Betsy's Page
HOME
Comments from an AP history
and government teacher in Raleigh, NC.
e-mail betsynewmark AT gmail.com
Commissions earned from selling items through Amazon will go towards buying materials for my classes. Thank you.
Site Feed
Betsy neither necessarily uses,
nor endorses,
the products advertised on this site.
The truth about Avesil
Cheap Hosting
Atlanta Bankruptcy Attorney
Dallas Bankruptcy Attorney
Wikio
Get exclusive travel deals and book discount cheap flights
Online Bachelors Degree
Comments from an AP history
and government teacher in Raleigh, NC.
e-mail betsynewmark AT gmail.com
Commissions earned from selling items through Amazon will go towards buying materials for my classes. Thank you.
Site Feed
Sunday, October 30, 2005
Patterico has some interesting background as to a case which Specter felt so strongly about that he argued it himself in front of the Supreme Court. They ruled against him and upheld the position that Judge Alito had outlined in his previous dissent of the case. (Link via Confirmthem.com - the "go to" spot for discussion and speculation on the next nomination)
The case that Patterico discusses, Dalton v. Specter, has some intriguing immplications as to the limitations that Congress can put on judicial review. Specter and his allies were protesting the closing of the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard under the Defense Base Closure and Reaslignment Act. They said that the Philadelphia yards hadn't gotten fair consideration. At question was whether the restriction that Congress had put in the law forbidding judicial review of the decisions of the Commission violated almost 200 years of tradition since Marbury v. Madison. Alito, on the Circuit Court had dissented from the majority and said that Congress had the right to so act. Specter appealed to the Supreme Court and argued the case himself. The Court went against him unanimously. I like this paragraph from the ruling.Contrary to respondents' contention, failure to allow judicial review here does not result in the virtual repudiation of Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, and nearly two centuries of constitutional adjudication. The judicial power conferred by Article III is upheld just as surely by withholding judicial relief where Congress has permissibly foreclosed it as it is by granting such relief where authorized by the Constitution or by statuteThwack!
Patterico wonders if leftover animus from this case might predispose Specter against Alito. However, Specter, more recently has praised Alito. Who knows what Specter really thinks? Who cares? I think Specter might rough him up a bit in the hearings and talk about super-duper precedents and all that guff but, in the end, I expect he would vote for Alito just as he did for Roberts. But he'll play to the limelight as much as possible until that moment.
0 comments
Comments:
Patterico has some interesting background as to a case which Specter felt so strongly about that he argued it himself in front of the Supreme Court. They ruled against him and upheld the position that Judge Alito had outlined in his previous dissent of the case. (Link via Confirmthem.com - the "go to" spot for discussion and speculation on the next nomination)
The case that Patterico discusses, Dalton v. Specter, has some intriguing immplications as to the limitations that Congress can put on judicial review. Specter and his allies were protesting the closing of the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard under the Defense Base Closure and Reaslignment Act. They said that the Philadelphia yards hadn't gotten fair consideration. At question was whether the restriction that Congress had put in the law forbidding judicial review of the decisions of the Commission violated almost 200 years of tradition since Marbury v. Madison. Alito, on the Circuit Court had dissented from the majority and said that Congress had the right to so act. Specter appealed to the Supreme Court and argued the case himself. The Court went against him unanimously. I like this paragraph from the ruling.
Patterico wonders if leftover animus from this case might predispose Specter against Alito. However, Specter, more recently has praised Alito. Who knows what Specter really thinks? Who cares? I think Specter might rough him up a bit in the hearings and talk about super-duper precedents and all that guff but, in the end, I expect he would vote for Alito just as he did for Roberts. But he'll play to the limelight as much as possible until that moment.
0 comments
Patterico has some interesting background as to a case which Specter felt so strongly about that he argued it himself in front of the Supreme Court. They ruled against him and upheld the position that Judge Alito had outlined in his previous dissent of the case. (Link via Confirmthem.com - the "go to" spot for discussion and speculation on the next nomination)
The case that Patterico discusses, Dalton v. Specter, has some intriguing immplications as to the limitations that Congress can put on judicial review. Specter and his allies were protesting the closing of the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard under the Defense Base Closure and Reaslignment Act. They said that the Philadelphia yards hadn't gotten fair consideration. At question was whether the restriction that Congress had put in the law forbidding judicial review of the decisions of the Commission violated almost 200 years of tradition since Marbury v. Madison. Alito, on the Circuit Court had dissented from the majority and said that Congress had the right to so act. Specter appealed to the Supreme Court and argued the case himself. The Court went against him unanimously. I like this paragraph from the ruling.
Contrary to respondents' contention, failure to allow judicial review here does not result in the virtual repudiation of Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, and nearly two centuries of constitutional adjudication. The judicial power conferred by Article III is upheld just as surely by withholding judicial relief where Congress has permissibly foreclosed it as it is by granting such relief where authorized by the Constitution or by statuteThwack!
Patterico wonders if leftover animus from this case might predispose Specter against Alito. However, Specter, more recently has praised Alito. Who knows what Specter really thinks? Who cares? I think Specter might rough him up a bit in the hearings and talk about super-duper precedents and all that guff but, in the end, I expect he would vote for Alito just as he did for Roberts. But he'll play to the limelight as much as possible until that moment.
Comments:
Post a Comment
