Spine?

This morning's NYTimes lead editorial put the Alito nomination into stark terms and brought forth a call to arms:

Judge Samuel Alito Jr., whose entire history suggests that he holds extreme views about the expansive powers of the presidency and the limited role of Congress, will almost certainly be a Supreme Court justice soon. His elevation will come courtesy of a president whose grandiose vision of his own powers threatens to undermine the nation's basic philosophy of government — and a Senate that seems eager to cooperate by rolling over and playing dead.

It is hard to imagine a moment when it would be more appropriate for senators to fight for a principle. Even a losing battle would draw the public's attention to the import of this nomination.

[...]

There was nothing that Judge Alito said in his hearings that gave any comfort to those of us who wonder whether the new Roberts court will follow precedent and continue to affirm, for instance, that a man the president labels an "unlawful enemy combatant" has the basic right to challenge the government's ability to hold him in detention forever without explanation. His much-quoted statement that the president is not above the law is meaningless unless he also believes that the law requires the chief executive to defer to Congress and the courts.

Judge Alito's refusal to even pretend to sound like a moderate was telling because it would have cost him so little. Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., who was far more skillful at appearing mainstream at the hearings, has already given indications that whatever he said about the limits of executive power when he was questioned by the Senate has little practical impact on how he will rule now that he has a lifetime appointment.

Senate Democrats, who presented a united front against the nomination of Judge Alito in the Judiciary Committee, seem unwilling to risk the public criticism that might come with a filibuster — particularly since there is very little chance it would work. Judge Alito's supporters would almost certainly be able to muster the 60 senators necessary to put the nomination to a final vote.

Well, that call seemed to fall on deaf ears earlier today, with Senator Robert Byrd and Tim Johnson saying they would vote yes (see WaPo).

But it seems that someone has found a bit of backbone after all--Senator John Kerry (via CNN):

Sen. John Kerry has decided to support a filibuster to block the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, CNN's Congressional Correspondent Ed Henry reported Thursday.

Kerry, in Davos, Switzerland, to attend the World Economic Forum, was marshaling support in phone calls during the day, Henry said.

He announced his decision Wednesday to a group of Democratic senators, urging they join him, Henry said. Kerry also has the support of his fellow Massachusetts senator, Democrat Edward Kennedy.

[UPDATE 3:10pm PST] Here's Salon's War Room with some info on the numbers game:

It's not clear how many other Democrats will get behind Kerry, but it's pretty clear that there aren't enough to defeat a Republican cloture motion. There are only 44 Democrats in the Senate -- 45 if you count independent Jim Jeffords, who says he'll vote no on the nomination -- and it takes 40 votes to keep a filibuster going. Democrats Robert Byrd, Tim Johnson and Ben Nelson have already said they'll vote for Alito, which would certainly suggest that they won't vote for a filibuster. Several other Democrats -- including California Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar -- have said that their "no" votes on the nomination shouldn't be construed as "yes" votes for a filibuster. And Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid just said on the Senate floor that Frist has given all senators plenty of time to debate the Alito nomination.

[UPDATE - 4:15pm PST] And this is what you get if you try to show some backbone, via Drudge: