EDITORIAL: Why Alito is the wrong choice

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 1/17/6 | Editor

[SmithL]

SUPREME Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr. was careful to avoid being too revealing at his Senate confirmation hearings, but he did answer the overriding question.

He is the wrong choice to succeed Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the nation's highest court.

In some ways, Alito's taciturn approach to questions about the great constitutional issues of our time was similar to that of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. But the distinction between the history of the two judges -- and the role of the justice they were nominated to replace -- are important.

Of the two, Alito had far more explaining to do about his past, and his answers fell short of satisfying concerns about his record of advocating repeal of Roe vs. Wade, highlighting his membership in a Princeton alumni group with retrograde views of women and minorities and all too frequently siding with government and businesses against individuals seeking redress.

One of the focal points in the Alito hearings was the balance of power between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government. That issue was not only timely because of the Bush administration's attempts to usurp the authority of Congress, but also because of Alito's past support for the concept of a "unitary executive" with extensive powers. In fact, as a Justice Department lawyer in the Reagan administration, Alito laid out a strategy for presidents to "increase the power of the executive to shape the law" by putting caveats with their signature on legislation. President Bush has been doing just that -- using "signing statements" more than 100 times to essentially reserve his right to ignore a law he might find unduly constraining. For example, in recently signing the torture ban, Bush included language that could allow him to override it for national security purposes.

[Noachian]

... -- and the role of the justice they were nominated to replace -- are important.

If the SFC editors think that the role of a SC nominee should mirror a previous justice then what about liberal Justice Ginsberg who took over Justice Bryon White's seat as a Clinton appointee?

Was she "another Bryon White"?

[Gritty]

Define regular...

Main Entry: 1reg·u·lar
Pronunciation: 're-gy&-l&r, 're-g(&-)l&r
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English reguler, from Middle French, from Late Latin regularis regular, from Latin, of a bar, from regula rule --

1 : twisted, perverted, belonging to a sick mind writing for a noxious newspaper written primarily for losers and other assorted Left-Wingers, Red Diaper babies and generally sicko freaks.
2 : --

[SF Republican]

"Why The San Fransisco Chronicle Is Useful Only For Bird Cages" - implying one would pay for it in the first place.

[hermgem]

Alito the wrong one?
Reasons: Assigned to belong, yes assigned in spite of contradictory facts, to belong to a Princeton Group that shuns woman, then accused of such a misdeed by a Kennedy who in fact has to hastily resign from a Harvard exclusive male club.
But the most severe handicap:
Alito will not make law, but to interpret law as written in the Constitution.
Yes, he bypasses international law.
Quite a long dragged out smear by these Democrats that lost the House, Senate, Governorships, Presidency.
How many more votes does one need to duly represent voters and leave the radical left aside?

[winner3000]

I only had to see the words "San Francisco" to totally disregard everything afterwards.

[Logophile]

In some ways, Alito's taciturn approach to questions about the great constitutional issues of our time was similar to that of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. But the distinction between the history of the two judges -- and the role of the justice they were nominated to replace -- are important.

At first glance, one might think that two judges were nominated to replace one justice.

Bad writing aside, there is something that the editorialist should understand: Sandra Day O'Conner did not have some special "role" to play on the course. She was one of eight associate justices. The Constitution does not specify that there shall be a "swing vote" on the court, or a "woman's seat," or a "black seat," etc.

Mr. Alito has been nominated to fill the role of associate justice. The notion that he should fill any other is nonsense. (But then, this is coming from the SF Chronicle.)

[lOKKI]

Unfortunately for the Chronicle writer, the question is only whether Judge Alito is qualified. The concerns about his philosophy are irrelevant. It comes back to the same old thing - if you want your philosophy on the court, you're going to have to win some elections.

[eleni121]

Didn't slick Willy put through about 1500 executive orders in the last few days of his term???

.................................................

Perfect response to the liberal liars who hide behind executive power issues.

[RayChuang88]

And you wonder why readership in the San Francisco Chronicle has been declining in the past few years even in liberal San Francisco.

[Carry_Okie]

Didn't slick Willy put through about 1500 executive orders in the last few days of his term???

Perfect response to the liberal liars who hide behind executive power issues.

I like it too.

[Howlin]

Yes!!!! I love this!

Can you help me out on the email thing now? Direct me to the place that has that whole Clinton-Gore email "problem" we posted about for years?

[Congressman Billybob]

This editorial in the San Francisco Comical proves one thing clearly. The Comical is unfit to call itself a newspaper.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column on Newsbusters.org: "AP Poll Biased: Anti-Bush, Anti-Republican"

[highlander_UW]

If the Liberals are so concerned about the environment why don't they begin by stopping print of useless rags such as the SF Chronicle?

[Carry_Okie]

Yes!!!! I love this!

Maybe you know somebody who can turn it into a talking point.

Can you help me out on the email thing now? Direct me to the place that has that whole Clinton-Gore email "problem" we posted about for years?

Methinks I'm having a senior moment. I haven't a clue what you're talking about.

[hsalaw]

and the role of the justice they were nominated to replace

Their whole argument (if any) fails at this point: the candidates aren't nominated to "replace a justice"; they're nominated to FILL A VACANCY. God help me, libs are so incredibly stupid.

[Howlin]

Oh, you have to remember, because I can't........LOL.........and I'm looking for "oldsters " who might.

It was something about losing emails on the White House server, which we never believed, and I *think* AOL was involved.

And, yes, I will forward that right away; thanks for the ping.

[MplsSteve]

The Minneapolis StarTribune's (aka The Red Star) editorial board is probably as far to the left as the SF Chronicle.

I'm awaiting their editorial too. I don't expect to be surprised either.

They'll likely call for the Senate to reject Alito's nomination too.

[Howlin]

I found this:

Clinton's Executive Orders
March 8, 2001
For twenty years, President Jimmy Carter held the record for the most number of 11th hour executive orders. Outgoing presidents have been notorious for stepping up their activity in the Oval Office just before they have to turn out the lights. But Jimmy Carter set the bar so high it seemed unlikely that anyone would surpass his record. President Bill Clinton, however, did just that. His flurry of last-minute executive orders broke the Carter record that stood for twenty years.

During his two terms as president, Bill Clinton averaged about one executive order each week. By doing so, he was able to effectively legislate from the Oval Office. He wrote executive orders to set aside large tracts of land as national monuments. He wrote executive orders to restructure federalism. He wrote executive orders adding "sexual orientation" to laws on federal hiring. He wrote executive orders prohibiting federal contractors from hiring permanent striker replacements. In other words, he exercised a legislative function: he made laws.

In the past, presidents have used executive orders in order to move the executive branch of government in a particular direction. Presidents have used executive orders to close banks during the Depression, desegregate the armed forces, intern Japanese-Americans during World War II, protect endangered species, and ban assassination of foreign leaders. President Clinton merely took an existing executive privilege and vastly expanded it to allow him to make laws while sitting in the Oval Office.

And President Clinton followed in the tradition of President Carter in putting out a rash of executive orders during his last few months in office. Just on Jimmy Carter's last day in office alone, the Federal Register (a daily summation of new rules for the executive branch) was three times its normal size. The regulations drafted by President Carter and numerous lame-duck regulators earned the nickname: midnight regulations. By the time all the dust settled, it was estimated that President Carter added about 24,500 pages of last-minute regulations. President Clinton surpassed that record with over 30,000 pages of new regulations in the last 90 days.

[hershey]

Drivel, drivel, drivel.

[SmithL]

I love the education I can get around here.