Here is the Gang of 14's original statement... (there is wiggle room)

(Read Part II-A: we need to convince them Alito is an extraordinary circumstance, I think that is everyone's position in this forum.)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -



MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS

We respect the diligent, conscientious efforts, to date, rendered to the Senate by Majority
Leader Frist and Democratic Leader Reid. This memorandum confirms an understanding among
the signatories, based upon mutual trust and confidence, related to pending and future
judicial nominations in the 109th Congress.

This memorandum is in two parts. Part I relates to the currently pending judicial nominees;
Part II relates to subsequent individual nominations to be made by the President and to be
acted upon by the Senate’s Judiciary Committee.

We have agreed to the following:

Part I: Commitments on Pending Judicial Nominations

A. Votes for Certain Nominees. We will vote to invoke cloture on the following judicial
nominees: Janice Rogers Brown (D.C. Circuit), William Pryor (11th Circuit), and Priscilla
Owen (5th Circuit).

B. Status of Other Nominees. Signatories make no commitment to vote for or against cloture on
the following judicial nominees: William Myers (9th Circuit) and Henry Saad (6th Circuit).

Part II: Commitments for Future Nominations

A. Future Nominations. Signatories will exercise their responsibilities under the Advice and
Consent Clause of the United States Constitution in good faith. Nominees should be
filibustered only under extraordinary circumstances, and each signatory must use his or her own
discretion and judgment in determining whether such circumstances exist.

B. Rules Changes. In light of the spirit and continuing commitments made in this agreement,
we commit to oppose the rules changes in the 109th Congress, which we understand to be any
amendment to or interpretation of the Rules of the Senate that would force a vote on a
judicial nomination by means other than unanimous consent or Rule XXII.

We believe that, under Article II, Section 2, of the United States Constitution, the word
“Advice” speaks to consultation between the Senate and the President with regard to the
use of the President’s power to make nominations. We encourage the Executive branch of
government to consult with members of the Senate, both Democratic and Republican, prior
to submitting a judicial nomination to the Senate for consideration.

Such a return to the early practices of our government may well serve to reduce the rancor
that unfortunately accompanies the advice and consent process in the Senate.

We firmly believe this agreement is consistent with the traditions of the United States
Senate that we as Senators seek to uphold.

and will never consult you so called moderates

Alito fits this situation, follow his paper trail. He has proved he has extreme interpretations of the Constitution. President should have extreme power over Congress; ignores the rights of We the People, rights of women, minorities as shown in his opinions to the court; corporations and legal authorities, according to Alito, have the power over the citizen, such as using extreme force, guns, to evict a family from their premises after a sheriff's sale.

If the Dem. Senators can not vote that this nominee has shown Extraordinary conduct in his early writing followed by court opinions that follow his early writing, they are not paying attention.

They have to decide if this qualifies.