By all accounts he is a low-key, pleasant man who respects disagreement and does not insult his colleagues on the bench. He is a cautious craftsman who takes small discrete steps towards his objectives rather than daring leaps. Where the law is hard and clear, he does not defy it or try to amend it judicially – though of course as a Supreme Court justice he will have scope to modify even well-settled law.
But wherever there is running room – opened up by gaps in application, conflicts in precedents, ambiguities in statutes – Alito is an activist who works steadily to push the law well beyond conventional boundaries of precedent.
The article delves into the issue of Alito’s views on executive power. Indeed, that issue seems to be a big one in the Alito hearings. But while Alito would likely be on the Court for at least 25 years, Bush has only three years left in office; today’s current events will eventually fade away. Or will they? Until recently, abuse of executive power hadn’t been a big issue since the Nixon years. It could be that the issue is just inherent in Bush’s and Cheney’s style of management and will disappear when the next president (either Democrat or Republican) comes to power with his or her own people and governing philosophy. On the other hand, fear of terrorism is probably going to be with us for a long time, even after Bush leaves office, and the presidency changes people. So executive power could continue to be a big issue from now on. It bears looking at – along with all the other issues, of course.
I wonder at the GOP’s present dedication to broad executive power; I sincerely doubt they would show such deference to executive privilege were it being wielded by a Democrat under the same circumstances.
I absolutely understand the concerns about Alito, but on the other hand, is there anything in his record that would actually justify voting against him? Just because you think you won’t agree with his decisions shouldn’t disqualify him from the court; that’s prejudice, and speculative prejudice at that.
I’m not really sure what I think of him. I’m glad I’m not a senator.
Alito Bork. Bork Alito. Let’s call the whole thing off…
I think it’s imperative that we work to boldly reinforce, in the public’s mind, the Bork-Alito connection. The GOP should not be free to exploit the skin-deep contrast between Bork’s Reagan-era right-wing bravado and Alito’s coolly evasive and placatory rhetoric.
There is one orgaization in particular dedicated to getting this message across (http://www.goodstorm.com/stores/leftink). I found at least two shirt designs devoted to raising awareness of Alito’s pernicious agenda. I advise checking them out. I’m really thinking about getting the “Acusar Bush†shirt for my mom.
It’s true. Most of what I know about politics I learned from reading t-shirts and signs at anti-war rallies.
Having been home sick today, and thus given the rare opportunity to watch much of today’s “action” in Congress, I think the real thing that has become apparent in the last 12 months is that the confirmation process has devolved into a worthless process.
Questions don’t get asked (Biden asked 2 questions in his 30 minutes), questions may or may not get answered (although I think Alito has already said more than Roberts), and that’s partially because the questions asked and statements made are so inane.
I think Alito is intelligent and he seems from all judges’ accounts to be a thorough and thoughtful jurist. I don’t think he’s Mr. Brilliance (aka John Roberts), Ivy League degree notwithstanding, but I’m not sure there are judicial reasons to oppose him. Political reasons shouldn’t be good enough to derail a nomination.
Our Congress is so horrible it makes you want to expand executive privilege.