People get ready …

There’s a train a-coming

THE NOMINEE to the U.S. Supreme Court “said many fine things about putting the law above his personal views, we find little basis in his record and positions—rather than just his rhetoric—to suggest that he will give respect to the commitments to freedom and equality embodied in our Constitution and our laws. Indeed, we are hard pressed to find a single major case or issue on which [the nominee] has broken with conservative orthodoxy to adopt a broader conception of freedom or equality. In this respect, he stands in marked contrast to other judges with whom he has been compared.”—Statement from the Center for American Progress.

“… . All evidence indicates that [the nominee] would use his undeniably impressive legal skills to bring us back to a country that most of us wouldn’t recognize: where states’ rights trump civil rights; where the federal courts or Congress can see discrimination, but are powerless to remedy it. This is not the America in which most Americans want to live.”—Senate testimony, head of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.

“I cannot in good conscience cast a yea vote.”—Dianne Feinstein.

“This is not just a roll of the dice. This is betting the whole house.”—Chuck Schumer.

“I intend to cast my vote against the nomination when the Senate meets here next week. For me, Mr. President, this is a very close question. But I must resolve my doubts in favor of the American people, whose rights would be in jeopardy if John Roberts turns out to be the wrong person for this job.”—Harry Reid.

That’s right. Harry Reid and John Roberts. All the comments above were made in 2005, when Chief Justice John Roberts was nominated to the court. Anytime a sitting U.S. president, if a Republican, nominates somebody to this court, expect the loyal opposition to be more opposition than loyal. This is nothing new. But expect the latest chapter to be unleashed this week when the sitting (Republican) president makes his selection.