Posted on 01/12/2006 10:57:34 AM PST by napscoordinator
Liberal Former Alito Clerk: Don't "F" Alito By opposing Alito, my fellow liberals and I run the real danger of shooting ourselves in our own left foot. Jan 12, 2006 by Susan Sullivan ( bio | archive )
At Most efforts at evaluating the nomination of Samuel Alito to the United States Supreme Court have fallen along predictable party lines. By opposing the nomination however, my fellow liberals and I run the real danger of shooting ourselves in our own left foot.
I was one of Judge Alito's law clerks from 1990-1991, the year the Casey decision was decided. I consider myself a social progressive. I am a card-carrying member of the ACLU and a liberal pro-choice advocate who supports abortion rights. I favor gun control, support gay marriage and oppose the death penalty. I also don't have a problem if you want to take "God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance. In short, no one is likely to mistake me for a conservative any time soon. Yet, I support the nomination of Judge Alito, because I know from having worked closely with him, that he is not a political ideologue and is not intent on advancing a conservative political agenda.
As a liberal, what scares me is not the prospect of having Sam Alito on the Supreme Court; what scares me is the way my fellow liberal Democrats are behaving in response to the nomination. I’m appalled and embarrassed by the fear mongering, the personal attacks and what I see as an irresponsible and misleading distortion of his real judicial record as well as his character. Now the threat of a filibuster lurks, and Senator Kennedy’s tirade about documents being concealed seems like little more than a pretext to justify such a threat.
In light of the Alito feeding frenzy, I feel compelled as a liberal and a former clerk to speak out and attempt to offer a different perspective to perhaps stem, or at least counter, what I see as a short-sighted, ill-considered and counter-productive attack strategy, made, sadly, by the very same liberal groups whose mission and philosophy I ordinarily support and embrace. I did not want to be part of the spin, but I don’t know how to stop it except to say what I know and hope some will listen.
In all candor, I expect that if I did not know Judge Alito, I may have responded to the nomination with the same distrust, fear and suspicion with which I usually respond to everything the Bush administration does, so I understand the genesis of the attacks by my fellow liberals. However, having worked closely with Judge Alito, I know that he is not a political ideologue intent on advancing a conservative political agenda. If he were, we would not have the decisions in which he reached or supported "liberal" outcomes. These include pro-choice decisions that affirmed and applied Roe v. Wade, as well as cases favoring plaintiffs bringing discrimination suits, cases that ruled in favor of criminal defendants, or a case that expanded a women's rights to seek political asylum on the basis of gender. These are just not the results you would expect to see if he were a conservative ideologue.
In my experience, having worked closely with him, Judge Alito never allowed his personal or political opinions to dictate the outcome in any case irrespective of its subject matter. On the contrary, he approached every case, including Casey, thoughtfully and carefully. He was always open to discussion and argument and always willing to listen and consider all relevant points of view. Judge Alito heard thousands of cases and wrote hundreds of opinions. Cherry picking “sensational” cases is at best unhelpful. Over-simplifying and mischaracterizing his record serves no one. Making unfounded personal attacks to insinuate he is racist or sexist is not only personally offensive to me as one who knows him, it denigrates the entire proceeding.
At this point, Democrats should be playing chess, not checkers. The threat of a filibuster is not only premature, it's short-sighted. Consider this: Democrats' attempts to filibuster Alito prove successful, because some Republicans are reluctant to change the long-standing rules of the Senate. Consequently, Alito's nomination fails. Check! In his place, President Bush then nominates a true conservative ideologue. We Democrats would most certainly and desperately want to filibuster such a choice but would be unable to do so because now those same Republicans who were reluctant to change the rules beforehand, would be frustrated by what they would see as Democrats' serial filibustering, and so they would now exercise the "constitutional" option and change the rules. No filibuster and we liberals end up with a super conservative justice on the court. Check mate! Now that's the really scary outcome.
I believe we need to tread carefully, temper our partisan distrust and think carefully before reflexively voicing outrage. Otherwise, we may actually undermine our own best "liberal" interests as well as the interests of everyone else. If you really want a Supreme Court justice who will approach each case carefully, thoughtfully and will reach a decision irrespective of his own personal or political agenda, please don’t “F” Judge Alito.
Susan Sullivan is an attorney in San Francisco. She was Judge Alito's law clerk in 1990-1991, the year in which Planned Parenthood v. Casey was decided.
Copyright © 2006 Townhall.com
"This guy" is named Susan Sullivan. And I think it's a good piece, preaching to the choir what they need to hear.
Excellent.
However, this writer scares me. Me thinks she is too smart to be a real liberal.
Hey, Kennedy. Stop drinking long enough to listen to this lady.
Bet you won't see her highlighted in the mainstream media.
LOL!!!
They'll be silent about her views.
It's so much fun watching them self destruct.
....a lone voice crying in the wilderness........
She's the wife of an attorney at my office. They both clerked for Judge Alito.
What's scary is that if she is right, Bush has wasted a Supreme Court appointment on someone who will not work to change the disaster that is Supreme Court jurisprudence.
I wouldn't be scared; she's not that bright, just honest. She even admits:
"In all candor, I expect that if I did not know Judge Alito, I may have responded to the nomination with the same distrust, fear and suspicion with which I usually respond to everything the Bush administration does..."
In other words..."Bush is evil. Normally all his decisions are evil, but this decision was good since I know and understand the rationale behind it. Bush may make additional decisions in the future which I can personally relate to, and therefore, will also be good, but until then, anything else he does which I don't understand will continue to be evil."
Typical liberal self-centeredness.
She's also a most rare bird: an honest, thinking liberal.
Thus, it's quite possible that, eventually, she becomes a conservative.
The Democrats are receiving lobby money to repeat such gibberish(especially Schummer, Kennedy and Feinstein). They must not have worked hard on their arguments and questions or they are too incompetent to present a useful dialogue and debate. Democrat Senators blew it!
I agree. If she's as smart as she thinks she is, she would have figured all that out by now.
Actually, her husband is the one I mentioned yesterday in another Alito thread -- he couldn't believe the completely nasty and untrue things that were being said about the Judge. He was absolutely thrilled with the nomination when it was first announced. (We both get to the office pretty early and had a long conversation about it that morning). I kidded him about being a liberal and sticking up for a conservative judge. He said "well, sticking up for this one, at any rate." They're both back in D.C. for the hearings.
Any questioning by the drunken sot, woman killer Kennedy is meaningless. The bloodthirsty Dums (Pro DEATH, abortion/euthanasia) mindnumbingly offensive. If I were an artist I would draw a picture of the Sinator, with horns and blood dripping from the mouths and hands of the evil Dums.
All those who clamored on FR for an Alito may want to read this real carefully. This is not going to be a consistent conservative vote on the court. You have only yourselves to blame for it, but you'll find a way to blame someone else.
Isn't Ginsburg supposedly in poor health? I seem to recall some Supreme Court function where she had to be helped to walk. Not to wish anyone ill, but what the hell is an ACLU lawyer doing on the Supreme Court in the frist place?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.