"Good judges are always open to the possibility of changing their minds based on the next brief that they read, or the next argument …”
Yeah but if you have a pre-conceived notion that you have invested time and emotion into then it’s not very likely is it? The question Sammy, is what mental baggage, if any, are you carrying that will make it very difficult or impossible for some folks to get a fair shake?
"The role of a practicing attorney is to achieve a desirable result for the client in the particular case at hand. But a judge can't think that way. A judge can't have any agenda.”
Yeah but we all know that some of them do. Scalia and Thomas? Who said anything about Scalia and Thomas?
“The judge's only obligation -- and it's a solemn obligation -- is to the rule of law."
What about the obligation to protect the rights of even the least of the citizens of the United States against both an over reaching government and the tyranny of the majority? Are these obligations included under your definition of “the rule of law?”
I might point out that the Nuremberg Laws represented “the rule of law” in Nazi Germany. Would you have felt obligated to uphold them? For a lower court judge it is sufficient to dedicate oneself simply to “the rule of law” but a Supreme Court judge must be concerned with justice. For what is the law but simply man’s imperfect attempt to secure justice? There will be times when it will be necessary to transcend the imperfections of the law. Will you have the vision to recognize those times and the courage to do what is necessary?
During his “questioning” Republican Senator Orrin Hatch made a pre-emptive strike related to the questions associated with Alito’s membership in the right wing Concerned Alumni of Princeton (CAP) group and his failure to recuse himself from the Vanguard case.
In terms of CAP, Hatch set Alito up to establish three counterpoints.
The first was related to any opposition to women and minority students, a position which CAP has been accused of supporting. Predictably Alito denied that he opposed minority and women attending college. We got the best quote of the day during this orchestrated love fest.
“Senator, I had never attended a non-coeducational school until I went to Princeton. And after I was there a short time, I realized the benefits of attending a coeducational school.”
I can't argue with that one. I can remember a whole bunch of benefits too.
As a part of this conversation they managed to work in the fact that Alito belonged to a non-selective co-ed eating club (wow, what a good guy!) as well as work in the whole humble origins, son of an immigrant Italian worker story. I could almost hear the theme from The Godfather playing in the background.
The second counterpoint was related to the belated information that Alito joined CAP as a reaction to the ROTC program at Princeton being terminated. As a part of this conversation they managed to work in Alito as a red white and blue ROTC member, just like Colin Powell, at a time when left wing radicals were bombing buildings in protest over the Vietnam War. I could almost hear the Star Spangled Banner playing in the background.
The third point was allowing Alito to deny that he joined CAP in a desire “to maintain some old boy’s network to the detriment of women and minorities.”
So what’s my reaction? I can sort of believe Alito when he says he has no opposition to women and minorities attending college. He may have back in 1972 but I don’t think there are too many left with this type of discriminatory attitude. I doubt the guy could have gotten this far if he was THAT bigoted and sexist.
I’m not impressed with the ROTC and CAP story. If there was a relationship, it was that he was pissed off that now he had to schlep to Trenton State (now the College of New Jersey) in order to complete his ROTC training and hooked up with a fascist right wing group that opposed the left wingers that got the ROTC kinked off campus. It may have been a reason but it’s certainly not a justification.
As for the “old boy network,” my reaction is oh cut it out! Setting up “old boy networks” for future mutual benefit is a time honored university tradition and by definition the networks are detrimental to anyone not a member.
As far as the Vanguard recusal question is concerned apparently a) legal ethics experts (another oxymoron) do not believe that Alito had to recuse himself, b) there was no possible financial benefit for Alito regardless of how the case turned out, c) when the question was raised, Alito did recuse himself even though he didn’t have to and a new panel was set up to re-evalute the case and d) the new panel arrived at the same conclusion as the original panel.
Given this information I don’t see any issue relating to Vanguard nor do I see the reason it was raised in the first place. I would suggest that the Democrats drop it as it appears that they can only hurt their credibility by pursuing the question.
Note that I left out the purely political horseshit thrown in by Hatch with some regularity. Why is it every time I read an article with quotes from politicians I get this irresistible need to go wash my hands three or four times? Now where did I put that liquid soap thingie?
No comments:
Post a Comment