The next SCOTUS Justice?
Rumors are surrounding the above gentleman.
Full Version: Alito
His resume is very impressive, and his family background gives him a perspective on civil rights that few others have. He's also a very handsome man!
Thus, look for the left to oppose him tooth and nail!
Thus, look for the left to oppose him tooth and nail!
The NEXT Supreme Court Justice ???? I didn't even know that Pat Robertson was wishing cancer on more of the current ones! 
Also, the reports this morning were that in his first SCOTUS ruling, Alito sided with the "liberals" in staying an execution. I don't read much into this, but it would be hilarious if he turned out to be another David Souter.
QUOTE
MIB:
The Decision of the Day blog notes that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit released three opinions authored by Judge Alito yesterday. Not that any of the media outlets that caricatured Judge Alito’s record will notice, but in one of the cases, Judge Alito rules in favor of a female plaintiff alleging gender discrimination, overturning the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the employer. (Of course, the larger point that judicial opinions should be evaluated on their merits, and not on who wins or loses, remains.)
Thanks for noting that, MIB, which I've not seen elsewhere in the general or legal online press.The Decision of the Day blog notes that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit released three opinions authored by Judge Alito yesterday. Not that any of the media outlets that caricatured Judge Alito’s record will notice, but in one of the cases, Judge Alito rules in favor of a female plaintiff alleging gender discrimination, overturning the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the employer. (Of course, the larger point that judicial opinions should be evaluated on their merits, and not on who wins or loses, remains.)
Someone else was bemoaning CJ Roberts' first ruling on the SCOTUS, but didn't bother to describe it. I don't know if he was referring to the first grant of a stay of execution to the FL inmate, or the second in as many weeks, or something else. Any deets on those? BTW, did Alito participate in the grant of the second? I believe it came down the day he went up, and I know he was eager to get to work.
And get you, Sandra Day! Leaving work in DC on Monday and then starting lectures at UofA law school by week's end. All that newly-bestowed leftwing praise must have been a real tonic! You go girl! Go West! :cool:
When is it going to be MIB's turn?
A man with his experience as a federal judge and all......
A man with his experience as a federal judge and all......
QUOTE
HotlantaTarheel:
Also, the reports this morning were that in his first SCOTUS ruling, Alito sided with the \"liberals\" in staying an execution. I don't read much into this, but it would be hilarious if he turned out to be another David Souter.
I love how the media is spinning this. It was a procedural ruling and had nothing to do with liberal or conservative ideology.Also, the reports this morning were that in his first SCOTUS ruling, Alito sided with the \"liberals\" in staying an execution. I don't read much into this, but it would be hilarious if he turned out to be another David Souter.
For argument's sake, however, let's say it was political. He could have easily done it to falsely and intentionally placate his liberal detractors, lulling them into a false sense of hope.
Nah...
Here's an interesting and well written WSJ op-ed piece on Justice Scalia's judicial philosophy. Agree or disagree with it as you will, but it's a welcome explanation of how he interprets the law. Link to article.
From Kate Michelman, anti-life leader of NARAL:
I am particularly appalled that local and national Democrats would hand our Senate nomination to someone who openly supports giving Roe an Alito-induced death.Uh, you might want to avoid the "death" metaphors, Kate.
QUOTE
I am particularly appalled that local and national Democrats would hand our Senate nomination to someone who openly supports giving Roe an Alito-induced death.
Alito, now ensconced on the Supreme Court, has sent a little love letter to James Dobson, the psychopathic homophobe who runs Focus on the Family. Dobson, BTW, was focusing on his ex-gay ministry today. I think some of the ex-gay crowd were meeting in St. Louis this past weekend. And they're meeting with peaceful protests, thankfully.
(Sc)Alito says he'll be keeping Dobson's "faith and trust" in mind...
[ March 01, 2006, 06:53 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]
(Sc)Alito says he'll be keeping Dobson's "faith and trust" in mind...
QUOTE
Dear Dr. Dobson:
This is just a short note to express my heartfelt thanks to you and the entire staff of Focus on the Family for your help and support during the past few challenging months.
I would also greatly appreciate it if you would convey my appreciation to the good people from all parts of the country who wrote to tell me that they were praying for me and for my family during this period.
As I said when I spoke at my formal investiture at the White House last week, the prayers of so many people from around the country were a palpable and powerful force.
As long as I serve on the Supreme Court I will keep in mind the trust that has been placed in me.
I hope that we'll have the opportunity to meet personally at some point in the future.
In the meantime my entire family and I hope that you and the Focus on the Family staff know how we appreciate all that you have done.
Sincerely yours,
Samuel Alito
This is just a short note to express my heartfelt thanks to you and the entire staff of Focus on the Family for your help and support during the past few challenging months.
I would also greatly appreciate it if you would convey my appreciation to the good people from all parts of the country who wrote to tell me that they were praying for me and for my family during this period.
As I said when I spoke at my formal investiture at the White House last week, the prayers of so many people from around the country were a palpable and powerful force.
As long as I serve on the Supreme Court I will keep in mind the trust that has been placed in me.
I hope that we'll have the opportunity to meet personally at some point in the future.
In the meantime my entire family and I hope that you and the Focus on the Family staff know how we appreciate all that you have done.
Sincerely yours,
Samuel Alito
[ March 01, 2006, 06:53 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]
So now it's somehow bad when a person sends a thank you note to someone who supported him?
LOL, MIB, you are so predictable! I knew that of all the posters, you'd be the first to rush in to defend ScAlito's love letter to homophobe Dobson! Not only is Alito's effusive language unusual for a Supreme Court justice, but it raises certain ethical questions.
But I know, you agree with Alito, Dobson and company. You really want these people to like you, don't you? frown
But I know, you agree with Alito, Dobson and company. You really want these people to like you, don't you? frown
I'll defend anyone--left or right--who is unjustly accused or who is vilified for something about which the accuser or vilifier is unknowledgeable or off base.
Actually, ft, as usual, you are wrong. Alito's actions are NOT unusual for a Supreme Court Justice.
Apparently some people see something sinister in this, as though Alito were not-so-subtly pledging himself to Dobson’s political agenda in his capacity as a Supreme Court justice. But of course "the trust that has been placed" in Alito is the trust of the American people, as embodied in their Constitution, which Alito swore to uphold in his oath of office. No less, and no more.
Both the New York Times and the Washington Post checked with the Supreme Court’s spokesperson, Kathy Arberg, who noted that it was Dobson who initiated the correspondence, and that Alito has "responded to scores of congratulatory letters from people of all walks of life," commonly including such a stock expression about living up to the trust placed in him. "Newly confirmed Justices do this all the time," said Arberg. It's not uncommon for them to send thank-you notes to many people. In fact, one Justice sent over a thousand such notes."
Write what you like and say what you like, Justice Alito. You have your job during "good behavior," and being polite is never bad behavior. But it is sad to note that in some quarters, good manners are bad politics.
Actually, ft, as usual, you are wrong. Alito's actions are NOT unusual for a Supreme Court Justice.
Apparently some people see something sinister in this, as though Alito were not-so-subtly pledging himself to Dobson’s political agenda in his capacity as a Supreme Court justice. But of course "the trust that has been placed" in Alito is the trust of the American people, as embodied in their Constitution, which Alito swore to uphold in his oath of office. No less, and no more.
Both the New York Times and the Washington Post checked with the Supreme Court’s spokesperson, Kathy Arberg, who noted that it was Dobson who initiated the correspondence, and that Alito has "responded to scores of congratulatory letters from people of all walks of life," commonly including such a stock expression about living up to the trust placed in him. "Newly confirmed Justices do this all the time," said Arberg. It's not uncommon for them to send thank-you notes to many people. In fact, one Justice sent over a thousand such notes."
Write what you like and say what you like, Justice Alito. You have your job during "good behavior," and being polite is never bad behavior. But it is sad to note that in some quarters, good manners are bad politics.
Originally posted by MIB:
I'll defend anyone--left or right--who is unjustly accused or who is vilified for something about which the accuser or vilifier is unknowledgeable or off base.
Can you give us a single example from any of your 5,351 posts where you have defended anyone form the left?
I'll defend anyone--left or right--who is unjustly accused or who is vilified for something about which the accuser or vilifier is unknowledgeable or off base.
Can you give us a single example from any of your 5,351 posts where you have defended anyone form the left?
I'm sure you can spend the time to find them.
The real question today is: Why no media mention of Justice Ginsburg dozing off during oral arguments?
Imagine if Alito had done this. Fantomas would be falling over himself to get into this thread and post some presumptuos and generalizing statement that I'll have to once again refute.
The real question today is: Why no media mention of Justice Ginsburg dozing off during oral arguments?
Imagine if Alito had done this. Fantomas would be falling over himself to get into this thread and post some presumptuos and generalizing statement that I'll have to once again refute.
Yeah, sure Supreme Court justices regularly write groveling letters to right-wing extremists. NOT! And MIB is going to provide us with proof, right after he...finds someone else has written it somewhere and he can plagiarize it.
This time I think I'll agree with Andrew Sullivan, who wrote:
[ March 03, 2006, 09:00 AM: Message edited by: fantomas ]
This time I think I'll agree with Andrew Sullivan, who wrote:
QUOTE
A few emailers have asked what I see troubling in the Alito thank you note to Dr James Dobson. First, Supreme Court Justices should be very careful associating with overtly political entities, and you don't get much more political than Dobson. Secondly, Dobson himself read it out loud on the air to brag of his influence on national affairs. Thirdly, there is more than just a hint of a constitutional quo for a political quid in the letter. That kind of horse-trading undermines the integrity of the court and the impartiality of the justices. Look: I endorsed Alito. But I hoped his jurisprudence would not amount to a carte blanche for whatever the Christianists demand. The letter suggests otherwise.
If you were on the "bench," "judge," would you write a valentine to a neo-Nazi or homophobe who "initiated" writing letters to you? Would you pledge to keep her or him or the anti-gay fanatics in mind and be thankful to them for their support?[ March 03, 2006, 09:00 AM: Message edited by: fantomas ]
QUOTE
The real question today is: Why no media mention of Justice Ginsburg dozing off during oral arguments?
read from the actual blog:
the special two hour argument proved less then compelling to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg who at times appeared to be, well, asleep
So was she asleep or just appeared to be asleep? She could have just had her eyes closed or her head down--we don't know. Ironic that Judy would be the one to say something considering:
the special two hour argument proved less then compelling to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg who at times appeared to be, well, asleep
So was she asleep or just appeared to be asleep? She could have just had her eyes closed or her head down--we don't know. Ironic that Judy would be the one to say something considering:
QUOTE
I'll defend anyone--left or right--who is unjustly accused or who is vilified for something about which the accuser or vilifier is unknowledgeable or off base.
Since you don't know for certain that she was asleep, that would make you "unknowledgeable".....so start debating with yourself.
QUOTE
fantomas:
And MIB is going to provide us with proof, right after he...finds someone else has written it somewhere and he can plagiarize it.
So you're calling the Supreme Court spokesman a liar? Unbelievable. But typical. If I had made false claims like you did above, I'd deny the truth too. And MIB is going to provide us with proof, right after he...finds someone else has written it somewhere and he can plagiarize it.
QUOTE
HotlantaTarheel:
read from the actual blog:
the special two hour argument proved less then compelling to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg who at times appeared to be, well, asleep
So you're saying a blog is accurate, but real news reports are not? Unbelievable. But typical.read from the actual blog:
the special two hour argument proved less then compelling to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg who at times appeared to be, well, asleep
Have you even SEEN the sketch? One doesn't participate in oral arguments as a sitting Justice with her head flat on the desk in front of her.
Even this news article mentions Ruthie dozing off.
QUOTE
Excerpt from that news story
The subject matter was extremely technical, and near the end of the argument Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dozed in her chair. Justices David Souter and Samuel Alito, who flank the 72-year-old, looked at her but did not give her a nudge.
Yet another news story explaining her snoozing. The subject matter was extremely technical, and near the end of the argument Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dozed in her chair. Justices David Souter and Samuel Alito, who flank the 72-year-old, looked at her but did not give her a nudge.
It truly is amazing how you super-libs are in complete denial of reality.
Again, had the sleeping Justice been Alito, Thomas, Roberts, or Scalia, you'd be in here screaming your Kool-Aid filled little heads off.
QUOTE
MIB:
If I had made false claims...
[Insert your own joke here]
If I had made false claims...
QUOTE
So you're saying a blog is accurate, but real news reports are not? Unbelievable. But typical.
WHAT ??? You're way off base. Let me explain it to you.....
No need to. I don't speak or understand liberal doublespeak.
Now it's time for me to take a nap like Ruthie did.
Now it's time for me to take a nap like Ruthie did.
QUOTE
MIB:
Now it's time for me to take a nap like Ruthie did.
Who's keeping an eye on the kids Now it's time for me to take a nap like Ruthie did.
while you're napping?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.