Alito: An open letter to Democratic leaders

(I'm going to be sending this letter to Harry Reid and Howard Dean. If you agree with its sentiments, I ask that you please cross-post it everywhere you can, and especially that you send it to your Democratic Senators. Thanks!)

An open letter to Democratic leaders

It has been with some astonishment that I have watched the apparent unwillingness of Senate Democrats to filibuster the nomination of Samuel Alito. This, despite the concerns acknowledged by voices both within (Senate Majority Leader Reid) and without (The New York Times, Seattle Post-Intelligencer) the Party that Alito represents a serious threat to both reproductive rights and the checks and balances written into the Constitution, and that he has the potential to set Supreme Court precedent giving the Presidency nearly unlimited powers, placing it beyond the limiting reach of either Congress or the courts.

It has been suggested that, perhaps, the reason Democrats seem reluctant to filibuster is that, owing to a perception of cautious moderation in Chief Justice Roberts, they see Alito as unlikely to be able to effect radical change on the Court as it would be constituted following his appointment, and that it would be better to save the filibuster for a future case where President Bush would seek to replace a "liberal" Justice like Stevens or Ginsburg with another radical right-winger.

Even granting the possibility of such an analysis, I think such an approach would be disastrous from both the pragmatic and the political sense.

In the former case, it is far too early to be able to determine where Chief Justice Roberts stands. Especially considering his own judicial background, not dissimilar to that of Alito, imputing to him a "caution" that would prevent him from letting the Court move too far to the right may be a tragic, and uncorrectable, error.

Furthermore, the notion that, by acquiescing now, Democrats would be better able to resist a later appointment seems illogical. In fact, the opposite would seem to be true; establishing one's willingness to accept a radical such as Alito on the Court would make it even harder to justify resisting a future appointee who is unlikely to be any farther to the right than Alito himself is, no matter who they may replace.

In the sense of politics, it is well-known that, to use the sports metaphor, "when your opponent is down, don't offer him a hand up." It's no surprise that President Bush has been, to use another sports metaphor, "on the ropes" for the past six months. We need to keep him there until November's elections. But, in politics, nothing succeeds like success, and a victory in placing someone as out of the mainstream as Alito on the Court would help Bush regain the aura of a "winner," as someone who can produce results while Democrats can only produce empty rhetoric. Refusing to put up a fight against Alito's nomination may give Bush the "hand up" he needs to reestablish himself.

And that's the second, and most dangerous, message that capitulation on Alito will send. So far, any hopes for a Democratic takeover of Congress in November lie in public dissatisfaction with Bush. But, if people are going to translate that anger to Democratic votes ten months from now, it will only be because they are convinced that not only do Democrats share their opinion of Bush and his policies, but that we are ready and able to take action to oppose the administration. In other words, whether we "walk the walk, and not just talk the talk." Refusing to at least attempt a filibuster of Alito sends the worst possible message to them -- the message that Democrats may whine about Bush and his policies, but, when the chips are down, we will always back away rather than put up a fight, no matter how high the stakes. If voters dissatisfied with Bush take that message away from next week's events, we may as well kiss next November goodbye. It's not that such voters will abandon us for another party; it's that they will decide that there's no point in participating altogether, as we will have failed to prove ourselves worthy of their trust or their vote.

There are a lot of people out there who are willing to fight for the Democratic Party in 2006, 2008, and beyond. But, if you want them to fight for you, you've got to fight for them -- and the strong possibility of Alito being able to swing the Court against a woman's right to choose and toward an "imperial Presidency" that can eavesdrop, imprison, and torture at will is precisely the very issue for which they need you to fight. Please, stand up for them, and for us, now, so that we may stand up for you in November.

Sincerely,
James David Walley

and our Democrat 'leadership' seems committed to letting the Republicans win.

a lot shorter and not nearly so eloquent. If they don't get the message that they can't "wait" for 2006---the time is NOW OR NEVER,then they truly are a lost cause. Revolution---when the American public finally wakes up, will seem to be the end result. I don't want that, but I see it coming. THIS TRULY IS OUR LAST STAND.

:kick: