|
Talking Points in Support of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. 11/1/2005
Talking Points in Support of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr.
- Judge Alito is highly respected by the right and the left for his intellect, integrity, academic and legal experience, judicial temperament and fairness.
- He has more judicial experience than any Supreme Court nominee in the last 70 years.
- He has decided more than 1,500 cases dealing with complex constitutional, criminal and civil disputes.
- As Deputy Solicitor General in the Reagan administration, he argued 12 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.
- The American Bar Association gave him its highest "well-qualified" rating for the 3rd Circuit.
- The U.S. Senate has confirmed him twice by unanimous consent when he was confirmed in 1987 as U.S. Attorney for New Jersey and in 1990 and when President George H.W. Bush nominated him to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Half of the current Democratic caucus in the Senate voted for him.
- He is committed to the rule of law and understands that the proper role of a judge is to strictly interpret the law and not legislate from the bench. He rules impartially based on the facts and the law in each case, and does not substitute his personal political views for the legislature.
- Judge Alito has consistently protected the free exercise rights of all religious people, including minority religions. He has ruled against government actions that discriminate or unfairly burden religion, and he has rejected government attempts to use the Establishment Clause to remove all things religious from the public square.
- Judge Alito has protected the civil rights of all Americans from illegal discrimination based on religion, race, national origin, sex or disability.
- Judge Alito respects federalism and states rights, and has deferred to Supreme Court precedents.
- No one can seriously argue that Judge Alito's nomination constitutes "extraordinary circumstances" that could possibly "justify" a filibuster.
- Filibustering nominees is wrong. That is very different in principle from suggesting that a nominee should withdraw or be withdrawn to avoid humiliating defeat.
- No Supreme Court nominee has ever been filibustered. The opposition to Abe Fortas becoming chief justice was bi-partisan and Fortas withdrew his nomination.
- He deserves a fair hearing and an up-or-down vote by the full Senate.
- Senate Judiciary Committee members should apply the "Ginsberg rule." They can ask Alito about his past rulings, writings and speeches but they should not ask him how he would decide issues in cases that might come before him on the Supreme Court.
- Replacing Justice Sandra Day O'Connor does not require selecting a woman or a minority. Supreme Court justices should be chosen first on the basis of their qualifications rather than their sex, race or ethnicity. To do otherwise would institutionalize affirmative action into the nomination process. The Supreme Court is supposed to stand for "Equal Justice Under Law."
- President Bush "didn't cave in to the right wing of his party" by nominating Judge Alito. President Bush fulfilled his promise to the American people that he would select the best qualified individuals with a track record of faithfully interpreting the Constitution and not legislating from the bench.
- Judge Alito's nomination is not divisive. It is the left that is distorting his record and rulings, calling him "extreme" and "out-of-the mainstream," and threatening a great battle and possible filibuster.
- The left's idea of a "consensus" nominee means cloning Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Twenty-two Democrats voted against John Roberts as Chief Justice.
| Printer Friendly Version |
