Samuel Alito

An interesting point of politics, and one that is too very often forgotten by both sides of the aisle, is that you can't always get what you want. More often than not, when you are the minority, the party in the majority will do as they please and you have a hard time stopping them.

Such is life.

It's hardly fair, especially if you are actually right, but there isn't much you can do about it unless you gain the majority and then enact laws or rules to protect the minority, in the event you fall into that hole again. Which given the cyclical nature of politics, you probably will.

Samuel Alito is one of those cases. I, for one, am not a big fan of him. The guy's definitely a wingnut from the right, and will probably do his best to overturn a lot of rulings that the Left in the United States considers sacred. Perhaps it will be politics, but more likely he will be able to find what to many seems to be logical reasons behind doing so.

Stare decisis was an oft-quoted term in these last two Supreme Court nominations that made it to the Senate Commitees. It basically means, "What was will stand," though the literal translation is "stand by the decisions." John Roberts, for his part, used it for everything from discussion about Roe v. Wade to his interest in putting sugar in his coffee. Nominee Alito didn't use the term as much, and simply watching him in his hearings was enough to indicate why: he really doesn't believe in a lot of the decisions of the last, oh, 150 years. That said, Samuel Alito is not going to be the chief justice of the Supreme Court (probably ever) and so his interest in standing by the decisions of previous justices isn't as important as it was for Chief Justice, then nominee, Roberts.

John Kerry and Ted Kennedy today announced plans to attempt to filibuster the Alito vote, on the hopes that enough people in the Senate would take their side and not try to break the filibuster. There are currently 55 votes for Alito that have been anounced (52 Republicans, three democrats) and chances are good that there are more than 60.

Kerry and Kennedy are doing the noble thing, but at the end of the day, it's going to be a political failure. The majority of Americans support Samuel Alito for the court, not because the majority of Americans are conservatives, but because many on the left and in the middle recognize that regardless of his politics, Samuel Alito is actually qualified to be a justice. He is intelligent and by all accounts very thoughtful and methodical. He is someone who will do a decent job on the court, regardless of politics. So attempting a filibuster will make these two gentlemen, and all who are affiliated with them, look pouty and out of touch.

The cyclical nature of politics relates to court appointments, too. It creates a lagging cycle of justices and federal judges just as much as it creates a leading wave of ideologues out for personal power and their own ideas. Samuel Alito is part of that lagging cycle, and regardless of his politics, he is qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. The left will eventually have its chance to place its own men and women on the bench, and I'm sure we'll take it. But with a majority of United States citizens behind confirmation, the Democrats should obey the will of the people and at least not stand in the way.