Samuel Alito, get ready for your close-up, said David Kirkpatrick in The New York Times. Next week, the Senate Judiciary Committee begins its grilling of the 55-year-old appellate court judge, who is President Bush's choice to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court. Alito has a tough act to follow. Last fall, Chief Justice John Roberts dazzled the committee with his 'œpolished and camera-ready' responses to tough questions about abortion, church-state separation, and gay rights. Supporters who have coached Alito in confirmation hearing dress rehearsals predict he won't be quite as smooth. 'œHe will have a couple of hairs out of place,' said one participant. 'œHe might not wear the right color tie. He will look like he is from New Jersey, because he is.' Still, they say, Alito should do fine, as long as people don't expect another Roberts.
What matters most, said The Boston Globe in an editorial, is Alito's judicial philosophy. And on that score, there's reason for concern—especially regarding his views on 'œthe limits of presidential power.' Newly disclosed memos show that as a Justice Department attorney under Ronald Reagan, Alito supported 'œbroad executive branch powers to spy on Americans.' Specifically, he argued that former Attorney General John Mitchell should be immune from legal liability for ordering wiretaps without a court order. That view is all the more relevant today, given the Bush administration's penchant for jailing accused terrorists without charges or lawyers, and for spying on American citizens without permission from Congress or the courts. The country can't afford a Supreme Court that's a rubber stamp for a runaway executive branch. If Alito doesn't express support for 'œthe judicial role of checking presidential power,' the Senate must reject his nomination.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
-
Voting: Should ex-felons regain the right to cast ballots?feature Attorney General Eric Holder denounced state laws that restrict convicted felons from voting after they’re released from jail.
-
Gun control: Has Newtown already been forgotten?
feature Three months after Newtown, meaningful gun-control legislation seems doomed to failure.
-
Gay marriage: How will the Supreme Court rule?
feature In March, the court will consider challenges to the constitutionality of both the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8.
-
The Supreme Court: Did Obama try to bully the justices?
feature The president's public caution to the Supreme Court unleashed a flurry of opinion.
-
Health care: Will the Supreme Court judge fairly?
feature Before last week’s Supreme Court hearings, most legal experts assumed the health-care law would be upheld.
-
Obama: Did his appointments violate the Constitution?
feature The President's recess appointments to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the National Labor Relations Board have raised the ire of Republicans, who say the Senate was not really in recess.
-
The death penalty: Was an innocent man executed?
feature In Georgia, Troy Davis was executed for the 1989 shooting of an off-duty policeman, Mark MacPhail, in spite of recanted testimony.
-
Guns: Would tougher laws have prevented a massacre?
feature Since Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert Kennedy were gunned down in 1968, more than a million Americans have died of gunshots, in crimes, accidents, and suicides.