Democrats in the Senate are pushing to hold confirmation hearings on President Bush's latest nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, Samuel Alito, in 2006. President Bush had made an earlier demand that Alito be confirmed before the end of the year.
'There's no way you can do an honest hearing by the end of December, or a fair hearing,' said Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont). Leahy is the highest ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee which will hold the hearings on Alito's nomination.
Senator Arlen Specter, (R-Pennsylvania) was non-committal about holding hearings this year. Specter, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, told reporters, 'This is a swing vote on the Supreme Court.... I don't know enough yet to say whether it's realistic by the end of the year.'
Alito has a very conservative voting record on numerous issues including abortion, civil rights, affirmative action, gun control, the death penalty and many other controversial issues. Democrats may threaten to filibuster Alito's nomination if they find him too out of step with the American mainstream on these issues. Republicans have 55 seats in the Senate. It takes 60 votes to defeat a filibuster.
Republicans have raised the issue of eliminating the filibuster from Supreme Court and federal court nominations.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) also said he favors a 2006 hearing on Alito so the committee has time to study 1,500 cases Alito has voted on as a judge and the estimated 300 decisions he has written.
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has indicated she would stay on the court until her successor has been confirmed. The court is scheduled to hear numerous controversial cases later this year including a November 30 case on parental notification in the case a minor seeks an abortion and a December 6 challenge to the military's 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy regarding homosexuals in the armed forces. O'Connor has often provided the swing vote in a number of 5-4 decisions in the past.
If O'Connor steps down after hearing argument in the case, the court has the option of issuing a decision with only eight judges or ordering a new hearing. If an eight judge panel splits 4-4, there is no precedent set by the Supreme Court's ruling.
