This article from yesterday's Philadelphia Inquirer says that "it would be hard to find a worse Supreme Court nominee than Alito, and also says his confirmation would "...give Bush effective control of all three branches of government and the hard-right long-term dominance of the high court."
Posted on Fri, Jan. 20, 2006
Alito would become Bush's enabler
By Robert Kuttner
At this moment in American history, it would be hard to find a worse Supreme Court nominee than Samuel A. Alito Jr. His ideology captures everything extremist about the Bush administration. If confirmed, Alito would serve as Bush's enabler. He would give Bush effective control of all three branches of government and the hard-right long-term dominance of the high court. His confirmation or rejection will depend on the gumption of Senate Democratic leaders and the independence of a few Republicans.
The article goes on to say that although presidents do have extraordinary wartime powers, President Bush has taken it way too far. In the recently passed bill banning torture, Bush used a "signing statement" - something never anticipated by the Constitution's framers or permitted by any court - to claim the right to interpret the law the way he wanted to and disregard those parts with which he disagreed.
The article also says that Alito backed this concept in his hearings! ...Alito's apologists insist that his views from the mid-1980s, when he worked at the Reagan White House, do not reflect his current conception of the law. But in a speech to the Federalist Society in November 2000, while a sitting appellate judge, Alito claimed almost limitless powers for the presidency and criticized other courts for limiting executive power.
"The president has not just some executive power," he declared, "but the executive power - the whole thing."
Oddly, while Alito favors an almost monarchic executive, he believes the federal government has limited powers to protect the health and safety of Americans or safeguard the environment. Alito and his compatriots in the Federalist Society are critical of the fact that, since 1937, the Supreme Court has held that Congress, under the Constitution's commerce clause, may regulate to assure everything from a safe and healthy workplace to honest financial markets. According to University of Chicago professor Cass Sunstein and the watchdog group People for the American Way, Alito has written the largest number of dissents of any judge sitting on the conservative Third Circuit Court of Appeals, and more than 90 percent of his dissents were more conservative than those of his colleagues. (emphasis mine)
The article mentions that even despite his record, and the current difficulties of the Bush administration, Alito is expected to be confirmed. It says that the Democratic leadership is concerned a filibuster would be a distraction, might cause them to be percieved as "obstructionist," and they are concerned about the nuclear option. (Wordie's note: the Senators need to be reminded of their duty under the constitution to give "advice and consent" of judicial nominees. How can they consent to this uber-conservative man, given his previous statements and his threat to the balance of powers? It is not "obstructionist" to exercise their
duty to protect the Constitution! It's worth risking the filibuster (and would the Republicans really exercise the "nuclear option"?) to protect our liberties and Constitution.)
Yet, in their weakened condition, it's not clear that Republicans could muster the votes to go nuclear. Moderate Senate Republicans may just welcome a chance to distance themselves from Bush's extremism - if Democrats lead. Alito epitomizes everything dangerous about George W. Bush. Unlike Bush, he would not be gone in three years. With some leadership, we may yet be spared an extremist high court.
Robert Kuttner (rkuttner@prospect.org) is coeditor of the American Prospect.
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/13668358.htm