When Judge John Roberts sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee last fall in hearings to succeed Chief Justice William Rehnquist, senators knew his conservative voice would be replacing another conservative voice on a split Supreme Court. Roberts proved to be intelligent, well-versed, well-spoken, even charming, and though he tapdanced around many of the most pointed questions, he garnered broad respect and eventually won confirmation with 77 votes.
But today, Judge Samuel Alito, a veteran judge from 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, will sit before the same Senate committee and this time, some senators warn, he’ll face a higher standard.
Alito is poised to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, a centrist “swing” vote on a court notorious for its 5-4 decisions. He’s been warmly embraced by the president’s most conservative supporters, most of whom are just glad his name is not Harriet Miers. But many senators have withheld judgment. They’re eager to know more about his judicial inclinations, and how far he might tilt the court to the right.
The stakes have ratcheted up in recent days. What appeared at one time to be a hearing focused on abortion has grown bigger and more complicated, with worries over Alito’s views on executive powers.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., told The Washington Post that all judicial nominees must respond to senators’ queries, but the obligation “is greater for some nominees. It is greater when a nominee has taken a clear position on a legal matter.”
Alito has written extensively about executive and congressional powers and abortion, and his judicial record is vast.
His writings, dating back to the 1980s, have argued for an especially powerful executive branch, which unnerves some senators, especially in light of President Bush’s defense of domestic eavesdropping.
On abortion, Alito assured several key senators early on that he had a “respect for precedents.” Those were meant to be code words to say he wouldn’t be on a crusade to overturn Roe vs. Wade. But 1980s-era memos unearthed later tell otherwise. On a 1985 application for a promotion in the Reagan administration, Alito wrote that “the Constitution does not guarantee the right to an abortion.” He now says he tailored his comment to getting the job. If so, what is the Senate supposed to think?
A legal memo also favored overturning Roe, but he says it reflects his role as lawyer to the Reagan administration.
The question is, what his views are now, and how night they affect his judgment on the court?
Alito’s supporters, barnstorming the country last week, paint the judge as smart, easy-going, humble. A 9-to-5’er who goes home to family after work, friend and lawyer Alberto Rivas told The Denver Post last week – not the type of judge who spends his off-hours at the conservative Federalist Society campaigning for higher office.
But on the same day Rivas said that, the front page of The Wall Street Journal told a different story, describing a visit to that very Federalist Society in 2000, where Alito argued for greater presidential powers.
Alito will now stand up for himself before senators keen to probe whether he is vested in reversing Roe and expanding executive power. He’ll hope to satisfy the committee that he holds independent and mainstream values, and he will have the nation’s full attention.
