Supreme Court Justice Alito Fundraises for the Right

Think Progress recently confronted Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito Jr. regarding his appearance and involvement with a conservative fundraiser. When Alito was asked whether it was appropriate for a Supreme Court Justice to attend a highly political fundraiser with the chairman of the Republican Party, Alito repeatedly stated, “it’s not important that I’m here.”

The gala that Alito attended was the annual fundraiser for the American Spectator, a right-wing magazine.

Last night, the American Spectator — a right-wing magazine known for its role in the “Arkansas Project,” a well-funded effort to invent stories with the goal of eventually impeaching President Clinton — held its annual gala fundraising event. The Spectator is more than merely an ideological outlet. Spectator publisher Al Regnery helps lead a secretive group of conservatives called the “Conservative Action Project,” formed after President Obama’s election, to help lobby for conservative legislative priorities, elect Republicans (the Conservative Action Project helped campaign against Democrat Bill Owens in NY-23), and block President Obama’s judicial appointments. The Spectator’s gala last night, with ticket prices/sponsorship levels ranging from $250 to $25,000, featured prominent Republicans like RNC chairman Michael Steele, hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer (a major donor to Republican campaign committees and attack ad groups), and U.S. Chamber of Commerce board member and former Allied Capital CEO William Walton. Among the attendees toasting Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), the keynote speaker for the event, was Supreme Court Justice Sam Alito.

This is not the first time Alito has attended a political fundraiser.

In 2009, Alito also headlined a fundraising dinner for the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, which funded the conservative journalist James O’Keefe and Delaware Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell. Alito is reported to have helped the institute raise $70,000.

Recently, the media was atwitter with the story of Keith Olbermann, MSNBC's unabashedly liberal-leaning cable television host. Olbermann had openly contributed to three Democratic candidates' campaigns. He was suspended for a short time for violating network policies. When he returned he openly apologized for the brewhaha that ensued.

He apologized to viewers for "not having known by observation, since it is not in my contract, that NBC had rules about getting permission for making political donations, even though any rule like that in any company is probably not legal.

According to the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, a justice should not "solicit funds for, pay an assessment to, or make a contribution to a political organization or candidate, or attend or purchase a ticket for a dinner or other event sponsored by a political organization or candidate."

What was Alito's response when asked about "the ethical issues raised by his right-wing political fundraising?" Alito repeatedly stated, “it’s not important that I’m here.”

Where is the outrage that a Supreme Court Justice is an openly "activist judge?" Hey, Fox News, are you outraged? Glenn Beck, where is the conspiracy theory? Rush Limbaugh, are you jumping up and down that an activist judge is so open in his pandering?

Nope! All those right wing commentators and pundits are too busy bashing anyone who doesn't think like they do.

Ridiculous You Say!

A tongue-in-cheek article, "Obama to Nominate Jesus Christ to Supreme Court", underscores the ridiculousness of today's politics.

President Barack Obama is expected to nominate Jesus Christ, an immigrant originally born to a virgin mother in Bethlehem, to fill the new vacancy on the Supreme Court. Although Mr. Christ is over 2,000 years old, He is immortal, so Democrats and Republicans expect that He will serve on the high court forever or until He decides to start the End Times. Republicans are expected to fight the nomination on the grounds that Mr. Christ would radically move the Court to the left. The GOP is also concerned that, despite decades of controversy and speculation, Mr. Christ has never revealed his position on abortion. Mr. Christ, according to many authorities, is expected to oppose the death penalty in all forms. Michael Steele, the head of the GOP national committee, issued a statement: "Christ is a complete mystery to us. He won't reveal His physical appearance and many of His positions are unknown or the subject of speculation. He is a stealth candidate. Why won't He reveal himself? Who does He think He is?"

Republicans are reportedly outraged that Mr. Obama even considered Mr. Christ, who has been widely quoted for his sentiments supporting the poor over the wealthy. In a Facebook post, former half-term Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin called for an investigation into the Bethlehem chapter of ACORN because of what she termed the "highly suspicious" coincidence that both President Obama and Mr. Christ had each spent three years as community organizers. In her post, Palin also wrote that "More and more of good God-fearing smalltime Americans from hardworking smalltime towns from great parts of this real America, West, South, East, North, are seeing more and more every day that Christ is a community organizer. We don't need another community organizer in the White House!"

Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) asked, "We're not even sure where He was born. Why is He afraid to show us his birth certificate?" Bachmann also announced that she would vote "no" when the Christ nomination came before the House of Representatives. Later, her congressional staff released a statement saying that the Congresswoman had forgotten that the House does not vote on judicial nominations.

According to Rush Limbaugh, "Christ doesn't know anything about free enterprise. This is part of the Obama conspiracy to drag us to socialism. If this guy is approved, I'm moving to Costa Rica." Sobbing, Glenn Beck attacked Christ's support for the separation of church and state, telling his audience "You know who else wanted a separation of church and state? Hitler."

Several Catholic priests were contacted for comment but refused to discuss the issue, and, even though they weren't asked, all empathetically denied that they had personally molested any children.

Democrats are optimistic about their chances of shoving Mr. Christ down the throats of Americans using normal constitutional and parliamentary procedures. Many Democrats are hopeful that Mr. Christ's past associations with prostitutes will earn him at least one Republican vote, that of Sen. David Vitter (R-LA).

If confirmed, Christ will be the first Supreme Court Justice who has at least one American city named after him: Corpus Christi, Texas.

Can Jesus rise above this?

GOP Wants to do away with Empathy?

On the issue of the nominee for the Supreme Court, Obama has spoken of the quality of empathy.

"I will seek someone who understands that justice isn't about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a casebook; it is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people's lives, whether they can make a living and care for their families, whether they feel safe in their homes and welcome in their own nation," Obama said. "I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people's hopes and struggles, as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes."

According to Major Garrett at Fox News, conservatives "are likely to line up against any "empathetic" Obama nominee for the Souter seat."

"President Obama has referred to this nice word empathy," says Wendy Long, legal counsel to the Judicial Confirmation Network. Long clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas, whom Obama has described as one of the kinds of judges he opposes because of their lack of judicial training and lack of empathy.

"(Obama) thinks judges should have empathy for certain litigants who come before them. Of course if you have empathy for everybody who comes before you, there are two sides to every case. If you have empathy for both sides then that's the same as having no empathy at all. So what he means is he wants empathy for one side and what's wrong with that is it is being partial instead of being impartial. A judge is supposed to have empathy for no one but simply to follow the law."

However, just three and a half years ago, Republicans thought empathy was a pretty righteous quality in a Supreme Court nominee.

TPM unearths a must-watch video in which Samuel Alito says that in his rulings not only does he apply the rule of law but he explains how empathy and his own heritage play a role in his decisions.

WATCH: Alito: Have to Consider Life Experiences when Ruling Cases

h/t: The Plum Line

A GOP Conundrum

It was apparent even before President Obama named a Supreme Court replacement for Justice Souter that the GOP would oppose his choice. It really didn't matter who the nominee was. What mattered to the GOP was that Obama, a "screaming socialist liberal," was the one who would choose the nominee.

Judge Sonia Sotomayer has presented the GOP with a conundrum. How will they oppose her? She was of course nominated in 1991, by President George H. W. Bush to a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

In 1968 she was confirmed, with solid Democratic support, and support from 25 Republican Senators, for the seat she presently holds as a federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

The GOP's answer is to call Sonia Sotomayer ‘not the smartest’ and an ‘intellectual lightweight’.

The Booman Tribune responds to these allegations with a witty article which is on point, BrainPower: Karl Rove v. Sonia Sotomayor.

Karl Rove is just one of several Republicans that have chosen to call Sonia Sotomayor stoopid in a transparent effort to make her selection look like an affirmative action pick.

This morning on Fox News, Karl Rove questioned whether she was smart enough to be on the Supreme Court. “I’m not really certain how intellectually strong she would be, she has not been very strong on the second circuit,” he said.

Let's take a look at Karl Rove's academic accomplishments:

In the fall of 1969, Rove entered the University of Utah, on a $1,000 scholarship, as a political science major and joined the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity...

...In December 1969, the Selective Service System held its first lottery drawing. Those born on December 25, like Rove, received number 84. That number placed him in the middle of those (with numbers 1 [first priority] through 195) who would eventually be drafted. On February 17, 1970, Rove was reclassified as 2-S, a deferment from the draft because of his enrollment at the University of Utah in the fall of 1969. He maintained this deferment until December 14, 1971, despite being only a part-time student in the autumn and spring quarters of 1971 (registered for between six and 12 credit hours) and dropping out of the university in June 1971. Rove was a student at the University of Maryland, College Park in the fall of 1971; as such, he would have been eligible for 2-S status, but registrar's records show that he withdrew from classes during the first half of the semester. In December 1971 he was reclassified as 1-A. On April 27, 1972, he was reclassified as 1-H, or "not currently subject to processing for induction". The draft ended on June 30, 1973.

Sonia Sotomayor's academic accomplishments appear to suggest a more robust intellect (not to mention, superior character):

She earned her A.B. from Princeton University, summa cum laude, in 1976, where she won the Pyne Prize, the highest general award given to Princeton undergraduates. Sotomayor obtained her J.D. from Yale Law School in 1979, where she was an editor of the Yale Law Journal.

Any questions?

Barack's Message About Sonia

How Smart!!!

Barack Obama has a You Tube message about his choice for the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayer.



Pass on Barack Obama's message to friends and family

The Pros and Cons of the SCOTUS Pick

The news of Barack Obama's choice of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace David Souter on the Supreme Court has set off a slew of opinions about his choice.

PRO:

Glenn Greenwald/Salon - Obama's choice of Sotomayor deserves praise

This nomination should be judged principally on two grounds: (1) her judicial opinions (which Scotusblog's Tom Goldstein comprehensively reviews here) and (2) her answers at her confirmation hearing. But based on everything that is known now, this seems to be a superb pick for Obama.

His choice of Sotomayor is a prime example of his doing exactly that, and for that reason alone, ought to be commended.

John Nichols/The Nation - Obama's Pick, Sonia Sotomayor, Reflects America

Sotomayor was not the most liberal of the prospective jurists, but that did not matter to conservatives who have been preparing for a fight. Wendy Long, counsel to the right's Judicial Confirmation Network, came out swinging: "Judge Sotomayor is a liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important than the law as written. She thinks that judges should dictate policy, and that one's sex, race, and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench."

That's a reference to a case involving applications for promotions within the New Haven, Connecticut fire department, in which Sotomayor was a member of a judicial panel that objected to tests used to evaluate candidates for promotion when no minority candidates ranked at the top of the list of those who took the test.

That white male jurists agreed with Sotomayor will be lost on her critics. But her record is generally seen as being very much in the mainstream of legal debates about diversity and affirmative action.

The swift strike at this nominee provides a reminder of how important this confirmation battle will be to conservatives, who see the fight to block Obama's first high-court pick as essential to the renewal of their sagging political fortunes.

CON:

Via Think Progress: Jeffrey Rosen allowed unnamed sources to attack Sotomayor as “not that smart” and lacking “penetrating” questions on the bench.

Via Crooks and Liars: Media Matters did a roundup of the Sotomayor attacks a few weeks back, including the hit job done by a New Republic writer:

Despite the glaring flaws, Rosen's assessment of Sotomayor was widely adopted by other media figures.

Mark Halperin, Time's conventional-wisdom maven, announced "Jeff Rosen Raises Warning Flags on Sotomayor" and described "Jeff" Rosen as "the New Republic's legal eagle." (What of Rosen's thin sourcing and dishonest quoting? Who cares! It's Jeff! He's a legal eagle!) The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder touted Rosen's piece as a reflection of "the respectable intellectual center." (Ambinder's colleague, Ta-Nehisi Coates responded: "You don't get to be the 'respectable intellectual center' and then practice your craft in the gossip-laden, ignorant muck. Not for long anyway.")

If the "respectable intellectual center" approached the prospect of a Sotomayor nomination by doctoring quotes in order to trash her intelligence, you might wonder what the disreputable fringe did. Well, National Review's John Derbyshire and Mark Hemmingway described her as "dumb and obnoxious," but they weren't really moving the ball forward in the anti-Sotomayor campaign; they were just interpreting Rosen's work.

Fox News' Andrew Napolitano told listeners on his radio show that Sotomayor "has a reputation for not being a very hard worker" -- like Rosen, citing anonymous law clerks to back up the claim.

Even David Letterman got in on the act. Here's Bob Somerby, describing Letterman's Sotomayor sketch:

Letterman's clip was openly racial/ethnic, a throwback to what once seemed to be an earlier day. With it, he gave viewers a throwback first impression of a sweaty, crazy, yelling jurist -- of a woman who graduated summa cum laude from Princeton in her real life, among other acts of distinction. But this astounding bad judgment by Big Humor Dave followed an act of grotesque judgment by the New Republic's Jeffrey Rosen. Rosen authored a gruesome post built on anonymous sources which -- let's be honest -- openly trafficked in racial stereotypes.

Dumb. Lazy. Temperamental. It's enough to make you wonder how she made it from the South Bronx to Princeton, Yale, and a federal judgeship. And remember: She didn't get there the George W. Bush way. You know many lazy, stupid people who win Princeton's highest academic prize?

Worst of all, there's no reason to think that the treatment Sonia Sotomayor received from the media over the past week will stop with her. The coverage of Sotomayor has clearly been built at least in part on gender and racial stereotypes, so we can probably expect similar coverage of other women and minorities who are mentioned as possible nominees.

Progressives over Centrists

Jeff Cohen has an interesting article about the need for Barack Obama to pick a new Progressive Supreme Court Justice.

The article is titled, Forget "Centrists," We Need Progressives in the Supreme Court -- Right-Wingers Will Fight Whomever Obama Picks.

The point is that "unless Obama gives up his centrist approach and appoints real progressives, our right-wing court may get even more conservative."

Read the article here.

GOPin' All Over Themselves, Once Again...

Justice David Souter has informed The White House that he will be resigning at the end of this court session.President Obama has not yet placed anyone’s name in nomination to replace Justice Souter’s. In fact, the President has not yet even suggested any names. Nonetheless, the Republicans have announced that they are “gearing up for a fight.”

GOP Gears Up for Court Fight

Senate Republicans admit they have virtually no shot at stopping President Barack Obama’s pick to replace Supreme Court Justice David Souter — but they see a definite political upside in waging a fight...

Conservatives Gear Up For SCOTUS Fight

A group of more than 50 conservative groups held a conference call early Friday to begin plotting strategy, sources on the call said.

"You're already having chatter between conservatives on who is going to be the nominee, what type of nominee is going to be put forward by President Obama," said Brian Darling, the Heritage Foundation's Senate director and a former top Judiciary Committee staffer...

Conservatives Gear Up for High Court Fight

Phone lines around Washington began burning this morning as conservative organizations kicked off preparations for the fight over President Obama's eventual Supreme Court nominee. Associate Justice David Souter's decision to step down at the end of this term has awakened a long-dormant network of conservative organizations that will do their best to augment — and at times pressure — Senate Republican efforts to frame Obama's eventual choice...

This week the Republican party kicked off its campaign to shine its party image.

Three prominent GOP leaders kicked off a campaign Saturday to reshape their party's image, gathering at a restaurant in northern Virginia for the first of a series of town hall meetings. The goal of the initiative, called the National Council for a New America, is to connect Republican leaders with voters across the country to help get the party's electoral fortunes back on track. "Certainly our party has taken its licks the last few cycles, but that's why we're here," House Minority Whip Eric Cantor said...

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said it's time for Republicans "to listen a little bit, learn a little bit." He advised Republicans to work on the party's message and "not be so nostalgic."

"I would say you can't beat something with nothing. The other side has something. The GOP isn't listening to the advice of Jeb Bush. They are certainly trying to beat the Democrats with 'nothing.'

The Senate Republicans might have reached out a hand, and offered some suggestions as to the type of jurist they'd like to see. The Senate Republicans could have suggested that they were looking forward to the nomination, and to the conformation hearings.

But once again the Senate Republicans have defined themselves as the "Party of NO." They have become the obstructionist political party. It appears that it doesn't matter to the Republicans who Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court might be.

The Republican Party is gearing up for a fight, because that is what “The Party of NO!” does. Legions of traditional Republicans are feeling disenfranchised by a party taken over by the Neo-Cons, the crazy Christian Right (who are neither) and the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and that 'drooling cretin' Glenn Beck.

Traditional Republicans as well as most Americans have grown tired of the constant chorus of fear and hate mongering. The GOP non-message has become repugnant. And the response by the Senate Republicans...”NO!” No to what? They don’t even know yet, but by simple knee jerk reaction, they scream out...”NO!”

Great job at polishing their image!

[H/T] Gil Ross