Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Samuel Anthony Alito Jr. (/ ə ˈ l iː t oʊ / ə-LEE-toh; born April 1, 1950) is an American jurist who serves as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. He was nominated to the high court by President George W. Bush on October 31, 2005, and has served on it since January 31, 2006.
On October 31, 2005, President George W. Bush nominated Samuel Alito for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Alito's nomination was confirmed by a 58–42 vote of the United States Senate on January 31, 2006.
A commendable example of the former is senior U.S. District Judge Michael Ponsor, who published an opinion essay in the New York Times in May criticizing Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s ...
Samuel Alito is sworn in as an associate justice by Chief Justice John Roberts in the East Room of the White House on the day after his confirmation, February 1, 2006. Speculation abounded over potential nominations to the Supreme Court of the United States by President George W. Bush since before his presidency.
Justice Samuel Alito was not present on Friday morning as the Supreme Court handed ... The 10 carry-on essentials that make for a first-class experience, according to pilots. AOL. The best books ...
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito spoke to President-elect Donald Trump by phone Tuesday to recommend one of his former law clerks for a job in the new administration, ABC News has learned.
Alito dissented from the Court's denial of an injunction, in a case involving a Washington state law that compelled disclosure of referendum petitions. The Court had previously decided in the case to reject a facial challenge to the constitutionality of the law, brought by supporters of a failed petition to bar domestic partnership rights to ...
Holmes v. South Carolina: 547 U.S. 319 (2006) Rights of the accused • right to present evidence of third-party guilt : Unanimous: Alito's first opinion on the Court ruled that it was unconstitutional for a criminal defendant's evidence of third-party guilt to be excluded based only on the strength of the prosecution's case.