blocked. The New York Times David Kirkpatrick looks at the "deep divide" that the Alito vote exposed on the Democratic side: "The 42 senators who voted against confirmation would have been enough to block the nomination if they had voted against closing the debate. But many Democrats were unwilling to do so because it would have drawn charges of obstructionism from Republicans, who have threatened to change Senate rules to bar filibusters on judicial nominees."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/01/politics/politicsspecial1/01confirm.html?_r=1&oref=loginFebruary 1, 2006
Alito Sworn In as Justice After Senate Gives Approval
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
WASHINGTON, Jan. 31 — Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. was quietly sworn in Tuesday as the 110th justice of the Supreme Court, taking the oath of office less than two hours after a sharply divided Senate voted roughly along party lines to confirm him.
His confirmation, by a vote of 58 to 42, is expected to tilt the balance of the court to the right on matters like abortion, affirmative action and the death penalty, and partisans on each side said the outcome would echo through American politics for decades.
Judge Alito and his wife, Martha-Ann, watched the vote on television in the Roosevelt Room of the White House with President Bush and his wife, Laura, and aides who had worked on the nomination.
A cheer went up in the room as the vote count passed 50, and Judge Alito and his wife proceeded to the Supreme Court for a private swearing-in. His oath was administered by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who worked with Judge Alito as a lawyer in the Reagan administration, and the two men sat with other members of the Supreme Court at for the president's State of the Union address on Tuesday night. <snip>