In a shocking development, the Washington Post (via MSNBC) notes:
[W]hen Alito described his personal history, his comments revealed a man whose conservatism developed not only in the cool corridors of a law library but also in the heated backlash against the perceived excesses of 1960s and 1970s liberalism.
Alito could thus form a relatively solid conservative bloc with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
That would leave Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, as the swing voter. Kennedy has compiled a record of conservatism punctuated by votes in favor of gay rights and reaffirming Roe v. Wade.
“Both Alito and Roberts fall closer to Scalia and Thomas than they do to O’Connor,” said David J. Garrow, a Supreme Court historian at Cambridge University in England.
I don’t think we need a Brit to tell us that Alito and Roberts aren’t exactly Sandra Day O’Connor.
So apparently the story here is that the US Supreme Court will be split pretty evenly between Conservatives and Liberals, with the tie-breaker being somone who’s generally Conserative but has a history of siding with the Liberals on a few very huge issues.
Just exactly how much more balance could we ask for?
Remember, this is what Senator Charles Schumer said about the SCOTUS nominations before he knew who the nominees were going to be:
It’s not about an individual judge… It’s about how it affects the overall makeup of the court. We are contemplating how we are going to go to war over this.
He even said it’s not about the individual but the “overall makeup”. And this is what he wanted to go to war over: A fairly evenly-split Supreme Court.
The horror. The horror.