Sean Rushton at the Committee for Justice passes along this weird rationalization offered by Senator Bill Nelson of Florida for voting against Judge Alito.
I explained how a recent Supreme Court decision has frightened many of our constituents who fear that their homes can now be seized by the government to make way for a private developer’s project. And while he expressed sympathy for the parties whose homes had been seized in this personal meeting with him he offered no misgivings about the legal reasoning that led to that outcome.
It was, of course, the Supreme Court’s liberal bloc that voted to uphold the property seizure in the case Nelson is referring to. If Alito is anywhere near as conservative as Nelson’s Democratic colleagues are portraying him, he likely will vote with the Court’s conservatives in favor of stronger property rights.
Nelson’s bogus rationale is surely driven by the fact that he’s up for re-election in a red state. He can’t say he’s voting against Alito because he takes conservative positions on issues like abortion. And he certainly can’t say he’s voting against Alito to please liberal interest groups or his Democratic colleagues. Thus, unable to speak the truth, he’s invented a conservative rationale.