www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Alito Hearings

Interesting!

"Senate Democrats who would use Judge Alito's Catholic faith as a weapon against him are advised to read the United States Constitution . . ."


http://www.earnedmedia.org/hli0109.htm

Sam

There's a lot of rhetoric and propaganda on both sides of the divide.

Nonetheless, I'm sure Judge Alito will be confirmed.

Logos Teen

On what grounds do you think he will be confirmed?

Well, news reports today said that he affirmed a constitutional right to privacy that included abortion. The report also cited several cases in his past where he supported abortion.
Looks like Bush gave us about what I expected.
-Daniel, glad he abstained from the last presidential election

I recommend finding a link to the proceedings and watching them instead of listening to the news accounts (which usually are not accurate about these things).

Here is what Alito said:

Senator Specter: "Judge Alito, do you accept the legal principle articulated in Griswold vs. Connecticut that the liberty clause in the Constitution carries with it the right to privacy?"

Judge Alito: �Senator, I do agree that the Constitution protects our right to privacy, and it protects the right to privacy in a number of ways. The Fourth Amendment certainly speaks to the right of privacy. People have a right to privacy in their homes and in their papers and in their persons. And the standard for whether something is a search is whether there's an invasion of a right to privacy, a legitimate expectation of privacy.�

Senator Specter: "Would you agree with Justice Harlan that the Constitution embodies the concept of a living thing?"

Judge Alito: �I think the Constitution is a living thing in the sense that matters, and that is that it sets up a framework of government and a protection of fundamental rights that we have lived under very successfully for 200 years, and the genius of it is that it is not terribly specific on certain things. It sets out some things are very specific, but some -- it sets out some general principles and then leaves it for each generation to apply those to the particular factual situations that come up. As times change, new factual situations come up, and the principles have to be applied to those situations. The principles don't change. The Constitution itself doesn't change. But the factual situations change, and as new situations come up, the principles and the rights have to be applied to them.�

What he did was to very skillfully tell them what they wanted to hear (the �living and breathing Constitution that means whatever we wish it to� thing) but then go on to say the principles and rights are consistent and don�t change, but are simply applied to new situations.

The �right to privacy� he seemed to affirm was clearly not the �right of privacy� that the liberal senators thought he was confirming. He is a genius!

Regarding the fact that Judge Alito seems to have supported abortion, there is a huge difference here. As a judge on a lower court he was compelled to use the rulings of higher courts as a guide. As a judge on the highest court in the land he can use the Constitution in its original intent, with a limited reference to past rulings that may have been wrong.

Like Roberts, I think Alito will be an excellent pick for the Supreme Court. But us pro-lifers cannot sit back and think the Supreme Court will overturn Roe vs. Wade and suddenly abortion will be outlawed. The overturning of Roe vs. Wade will place the matter back into the state legislatures. My guess is that it will take a dozen or more years to enact some limits on abortion (perhaps restricting them after the �first trimester�). There is still much work to do to lead the culture to respect life.

Duplicity is not genius. Or have people changed their minds on the brilliance of: "what the meaning of 'is' is"? I am cautiously optimistic about Alito. But I am a little concerned about this duplicity. And his answer about the his pride in that dreadful Princeton alum association lacked any credibility. Maybe, back then, he was just telling conservatives what they wanted to hear.

djs,

We disagree yet again! The duplicity, I think, comes from those on both sides of the aisle who hold a pro-abortion view as a litmus test while claiming they are not. I think the responses given by Alito (like Roberts before him) were signs of genius. He gave a reasonable good description of original intent packaged in words that his questioners wanted to hear.

Regarding the alumi association, I think that the unfairness comes with the attempted guilt by association. I disagree with Senator Kennedy (for example) on many things. Yet I do not consider him to be an anti-Semite simply because his father was one.

Admin

The duplicity of the Senators in no way excuses the duplicity that you described in Alito. I may not agree with Bork, but I respect him greatly as a man. I may agree more with Alito, but his duplicity is not respectable.

Your comparison between Kennedy and his father and Alito's membership in a questionalbe organization is not fair. Kennedy did not choose his father. Alito chose to join the organization, and chose, at age 35, to trumpet his pride in the organization. There may be a perfectly good exalpanation for this. But to claim no recollection is simply not credible.

I always think it's amusing to hear Ted Kennedy express concern about whether OTHER people are "above the law".