October 31, 2005

Bush picks Samuel Alito for the US Supreme Court! Good job! No more swing vote!

by @ 12:55 pm. Filed under The Truth Shall Set you Free!

Today President Bush made a good pick in selecting Samuel Alito as the new nominee for the US Supreme Court! He has a record that shows he was well qualified for the position. In this selection Bush showed that he really wanted the best available and not a candidate that might fulfill superficial desires outside of solid respect for the US Constitution!

Justice Alito is a candidate that was praised by Senators in 1990, when he was nominated to the federal appeals court by President George H.W. Bush. Then even many Liberal Senators gave him their full support. It will be interesting to see how they treat him this time around and how many of them attempt to distance themselves from their prior comments about him.

Some decisions of note that Samuel Alito was involved in:

Among his noteworthy opinions was his lone dissent in the 1991 case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, in which the 3rd Circuit struck down a Pennsylvania law that included a provision requiring women seeking abortions to notify their spouses.

“The Pennsylvania legislature could have rationally believed that some married women are initially inclined to obtain an abortion without their husbands’ knowledge because of perceived problems ? such as economic constraints, future plans, or the husbands’ previously expressed opposition ? that may be obviated by discussion prior to the abortion,” Alito wrote.

In a 1999 case, Fraternal Order of Police v. City of Newark, the 3rd Circuit ruled 3-0 that Muslim police officers in the city can keep their beards. The police had made exemption in its facial hair policy for medical reasons (a skin condition known as pseudo folliculitis barbae) but not for religious reasons.

Alito wrote the opinion, saying, “We cannot accept the department’s position that its differential treatment of medical exemptions and religious exemptions is premised on a good-faith belief that the former may be required by law while the latter are not.”
In July 2004, the 3rd Circuit Court ruled that a Pennsylvania law prohibiting student newspapers from running ads for alcohol was unconstitutional. At issue was Act 199, an amendment to the Pennsylvania Liquor Code passed in 1996 that denied student newspapers advertising revenue from alcoholic beverages.

Alito said the law violated the First Amendment rights of the student newspaper, The Pitt News, from the University of Pittsburgh.

“If government were free to suppress disfavored speech by preventing potential speakers from being paid, there would not be much left of the First Amendment,” Alito wrote.

In 1999, Alito was part of a majority opinion in ACLU v. Schundler. At issue was a holiday display in Jersey City. The court held that the display didn’t violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment because in addition to a creche and a menorah, it also had a Frosty the Snowman and a banner hailing diversity.

In the case of Homar v. Gilbert in 1996, Alito wrote the dissenting opinion that a state university didn’t violate the due process rights of a campus police officer when they suspended him without pay after they learned he had been arrested on drug charges.

One of the most notable opinions was Alito’s dissent in the 1996 case of Sheridan v. Dupont, a sex discrimination case. Alito wrote that a plaintiff in such a case should not be able to withstand summary judgment just by casting doubt on an employer’s version of the story.

In Fatin v. INS (1993), Alito joined the majority in ruling that an Iranian woman seeking asylum could establish eligibility based on citing that she would be persecuted for gender and belief in feminism.

In a 1996 ruling that upheld the constitutionality of a federal law banning the possession of machine guns, Alito argued for greater state rights in reasoning that Congress had no authority to regulate private gun possession.

He has also gone on record as saying:

“Most of the labels people use to talk about judges, and the way judges decide (cases) aren’t too descriptive. … Judges should be judges. They shouldn’t be legislators, they shouldn’t be administrators.”

He gets a solid THUMBS UP from me! I support the Alito nomination!

On the negative side of politics:
New York Senator Charles Schumer is trying to compare how Jusitce Alito might “sit” with the court to Rosa Parks when she “sat” for justice! As usual Schumer has no bottom in how low he will dig, in an effort to trash anyone that does not tow his Liberal line. Rosa Parks fought for her Constitutional rights to be protected. As true Constitutionalists like Justice Alito do, but people like low down Chucky never seem to understand that! Given we know Chuck would like for the federal government to continue forcing states to allow people to kill their own babies in the womb! As usual Senator Schumer, you disgust me. But your anger at this nomination helps me know for certain that he is a good pick!

update (10/31/2005 12:02PM ET): Hugh Hewitt has more about Chucky!

2 Responses to “Bush picks Samuel Alito for the US Supreme Court! Good job! No more swing vote!”

  1. The Moderate Voice Says:

    Bush Nominates Solidly Conservative Nominee To Supreme Court: The Big Battle Begins? (UPDATED)

    President George Bush has nominated conservative judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court — giving conservatives the kind of judge they hoped they were going to get after …

  2. Independent Conservative Says:

    Samuel Alito’s work in cases related to Civil Rights

    Here are some cases Samuel Alito was involved in that are Civil Rights related. They are cases that show he does protect Civil Rights as guaranteed by our Constitution.

Independent Conservative - Copyright 2022 - Copyright Notice

[powered by WordPress.]

93 queries. 0.270 seconds