well, this is a new wrinkle: people who know or work with a nominee can't be objective and should be ignored?
Just listen to us 'non-partisans'?
Latest from Scotusblog
12:55 Kennedy asks Shaw and Turner to comment on Riley v. Turner, which had to do with statistical evidence in jury bias cases.
Shaw: Jury selection bias is a hugely important issue to the Fund, which has been litigating such cases since its begining. Alito's decision in that case trivialized the extent of the problem. Philadelphia has had recent severe problems in this area.
Turner: Justice O'Connor understands that race still matters in this country, particularly in courts and jury selection. Jury bias strikes at the heart of fundamental justice in our society. Alito minimizes, if not completely disregards, those principles.
12:53 Specter asks the clerks if Alito favors the powerful:
They say he doesn't have any predisposition. He has ruled in favor of both the government and the little guy.
12:51 Specter asks Schultz whether if Alito is rejected, the replacement will be better in her view.
A: Americans have a right to expect that the President won't nominate an extremist.
12:50 Specter asks Reginald Turner whether he is swayed by testimony of judge Lewis or Mr. White's about Alito's fairmindedness.
A: He recognizes that Alito has had collegial relationships. But Turner's opposition is based on the record, that shows a tendancy of ruling against minorities and women and in favor of businesses and the government.
12:48 Specter asks Mr. White on his sense of Alito's views on equality of opportunity for African Americans.
A: he worked on cases with Alito on a number of race-based civil rights cases. Alito came to the cases with an open mind and fairness.