Today marked the first day of the Senate Judicial Committee hearings on judicial nominee Samuel Alito Jr. The committee opened by allowing each of the fifteen senators on the committee to give a ten minute opening statement directed to Alito. These opening statements were so action packed I was drowning in my morning cereal by minute five. However, this is not an issue to be taken lightly. If confirmed, Alito will sit on the highest court in the United States for life.
Isn't the Supreme Court just a bunch of old dudes wearing dresses?
Though the gowns they adorn my seem a bit odd, (styled after the Roman Toga) but their rulings have an impact on every citizen in the United States. And the seat Alito will be filling is perhaps more crucial than that of the Chief Justice, currently held by John Roberts. Alito has been nominated to fill the seat of Sandra Day OConner, who has agreed to sit on the court after her retirement until her replacement has been confirmed.
For nearly two decades, Sandra Day O’Conner has been the crucial swing vote in a divided court. She has cast over 140 tie-breaking votes since being sworn into the Supreme Court in 1981. O’Conner was also the first woman nominated to the court, and ruled consistently to advance woman’s rights, a person’s right to privacy and maintaining a fair separation of powers between the three branches of government. O’Conner has struck down both state and federal laws, sighting them to be unconstitutional. For this, she has been labeled by some conservatives as an "activist" Judge.
An "activist" Judge makes biased rulings based on personal beliefs, conviction or morals regardless of the law. Activist Judges are also accused of "Legislating" from the bench, creating laws instead of interpreting them. O’Conner, however, made decisions based on the highest doctrine of law in the United States, the Constitution. She has ruled time and again to ensure that none of our fundamental rights, as set forth by the Constitution, have been violated.
ZZZZZZZZZ...
OK, so enough with the history of O’Conner. What about Alito? Several of the Democrats on the committee cited examples of rulings where Alito had ruled, as a Federal Appellate Court judge, to restrict a persons right to privacy, and in one case his opinion stated that private citizens have no constitutional right to privacy. (What constitution did he study? The 4th Amendment) (For specific examples of Alito's track record against personal privacy, click here) Alito has also written negatively against the Warren Court, (named as such, because the presiding Chief Justice at the time was Earl Warren) One of the Warren Court's most infamous ruling was involving "reapportionment" (referred to as One man, one vote) requiring electoral districts to have equal populations and helped to ensure greater representation for minorities. Alito has also been accused of not supporting the Warren Courts dessision in Brown v. Board of Education, the land mark ruling ending segregation in public schools. You can read more about the legacy of the Warren Court by clicking here
Sunset for Roe V. Wade
Perhaps the most controversial Supreme Court ruling in our history has been Roe V. Wade. With a conservative Judge rearing to take the place of O’Conner, Roe is perhaps, for the first time since the land mark ruling, in danger of being overturned. Pleas understand that I am not arguing the validity of Roe, nor am I soliciting support for the ruling. However, it is very possible that the Court could overturn Roe easier than you may think. When the ruling was first handed down, it contained a Sun Set Clause (means for reversal in a law, or ruling) that stated if there ever was evidence determining when life in a fetus begins, Roe would become void.
We are only in the first day of the hearings. The Democrats have cited several rulings handed down by Alito that do seem to paint him as not supporting privacy, against abortion, and supporting a weaker separation of powers. Citing a few cases, however, cannot sum Alito's entire history of over 300 rulings. Alito has since said that he does support aspects of the Warren Court, and believes in upholding precedence. We also know that mere lip service cannot provide an accurate forecast of how he will rule on the Supreme Court. And this is, after all, only the first stage in the confirmation process. He will be questioned thoroughly about his past decisions. Our only recourse is to turn away from the sunny shores of Laguna Beach for a while, and educate ourselves on this man who has been nominated to a lifetime position crafting the future of America. If we don't like what we see, then it is our responsibility to write our senators encouraging them to vote against Samuel Alito Jr. I can't force you to pay attention, but I hope I have helped you in understanding the weight this nomination holds. Until next time, fair well and amen.
Cody Hobbs
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I like seeing you take the effort, but the fact is writing a senator wont do a whole lot, maybe if you send in a copy of your registration card it would help, but most really don't care. Lets just be glad the republicans are actually starting to figure out Bush isn't the best leader and not all his decsions are good and are voting how they want and doing what they want. Is this guy the best for the job? Not my place to say, always remember though, there are alot worse.
I have to agree with tank on this one man... I may not like Alito but there is nothing I can do, other then hope for the best.
~K
Or vote for Different Senators. That is one of the things you take into account when you vote for them.
~Virginia
oh and another thing, where do you get anything about abortion in this:
"...secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,..."
The rights to privacy that abortion would entale are not explicitly given in any part of the constitution, and certainly not in that. Also, Roe v. Wade, like you said, never says when life begins, and if you look at it biologically, it is at the moment of conception. That's scientific fact, not opinion, belief, or what have you. I'm not saying that abortion should be legal or illegal, but THAT case should be overturned. Its too easily beaten down to stand on anymore, and Alito should throw it out.
~Virginia
Virginia, you are absolutely correct. Although there is a group that has had notable success by sending letters and e-mails to public officials, as well as to networks and advertisers. (www.afa.net)
Virginia,
That will be the turning point when it comes to abortion. If it is determined by the courts that life does begin at conception, then no, the 4th Amendment would not apply, and Roe would be over-turned. Moreover, if it is determined that life begins at conception, then Abortion would be Constitutionally illeagal. (The fetus would then be granted protection under the 14th Amendment.)
Scentific fact? I thought the whole real point of science is there is no true way to prove something as a fact. Most scentific "facts" you people come up with are tested on a ridiculious scale to where it could and would never happen, like how saccarin causes cancer in rats, only if you give them enough that no human could ever even take in. And I will be the one with the balls here, abortion should be legal, or the death penalty should be removed along with it, cause either way someone who's precious life if being taken.
Comparing a crimminal to a child is like comparing apples to oranges. There are things that can be proven as scientific "fact." Sure its science and it changes, and it may not be the same tomorrow as it is today. But, organisms and creation therein have not changed. Who said anything about saccarin? And I'll grow bigger balls and say that ethically speeking, abortion should be illegal, and the death penalty should be enforced.
~Virginia
Post a Comment