by TChris

In his application to join the Justice Department during the Reagan administration, Judge Alito emphasized his pride in working against abortion rights and “racial and ethnic quotas,” and pointed to his “disagreement with Warren Court decisions, particularly in the areas of criminal procedure, the Establishment Clause and reapportionment.” Alito’s apparent zeal to retrench the progress that the law has made in each of those areas is cause for alarm. Today, Sen. Biden singled out the least contentious of those issues -- reapportionment -- to question whether Alito has embraced a view of the law that is well outside the mainstream.

"The part that jeopardizes it (Alito's nomination) more is his quote in there saying that he had strong disagreement with the Warren Court particularly on reapportionment - one man, one vote," Biden told "Fox News Sunday." "The fact that he questioned abortion and the idea of quotas is one thing. The fact that he questioned the idea of the legitimacy of the reapportionment decisions of the Warren Court is even something well beyond that," Biden said.

Biden dropped the F-word -- filibuster -- as a remedy if Alito seems primed to reshape the law to suit an extreme agenda.

And the hits, they just keep coming. This one sounds well-deserved.

Alito put his personal opinion out there in 1985 when he sent a document to the Reagan administration, along with his application to become a deputy assistant attorney general, saying his previous government work had included helping "to advance legal positions in which I personally believe very strongly."

"I am particularly proud of my contributions in recent cases in which the government argued that racial and ethnic quotas should not be allowed and that the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion," wrote Alito, who was then working for the solicitor general's office.

Could it get any worse? Yes.

The Newark Ledger today has an analysis of more than 200 opinions Judge Alito authored on criminal law during his 15 years on the bench.

As senators and advocacy groups pore over legal writings by Alito, the New Jersey native nominated to the Supreme Court, they will find a by-the-book interpreter of the law whose opinions in criminal matters reflect his many years as a federal prosecutor in New Jersey and advocate for Justice Department in Washington.

If the decision is close, Alito tends to side with law enforcement and rarely treads new ground, according to interviews with legal scholars and a review of more than two dozen opinions he has written in the past 15 years....Alito seems willing to give the benefit of the doubt to law enforcement.

The article cites several examples. [Via Sentencing Law and Policy whose author, Law Prof Doug Berman, is quoted in the article.]

In a Sunday editorial, the New York Times has some wise words for Democrats about Judge Alito.

The Alito nomination comes at a critical moment for the Democratic Party. With President Bush's poll numbers plummeting, Democrats are finding a new optimism about their chances in 2006 and 2008. But to capitalize on the Republicans' weakness, the party needs to show that it has an alternative vision for the country. As the Democrats refine their message for next year's elections, the first thing they need to be able to say to the American people is that they did not sit by idly while the far right took over the Supreme Court and began dismantling fundamental rights and freedoms.

The New York Times Saturday reports that Judge Alito is a "conservative libertarian," one of a growing number of judges who rule in favor of First Amendment rights but take a much dimmer view of consitutional guarantees designed to protect the criminally accused:

Judge Alito's broad reading of the freedom of speech and press clauses of the First Amendment stands in contrast with his narrower interpretation of other constitutional rights, including the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches and the Sixth Amendment's guarantees of fair trial rights for criminal defendants....Judge Alito has exhibited little patience for the First Amendment claims of prisoners.

Right after I read this article, I happened upon an article in the Palm Beach Post reporting that Rush Limbaugh had another hearing Wednesday at which his lawyers argued that his medical records and communications were privileged and could not be used to support a charge of doctor shopping against him.

by TChris

Two articles today raise questions that Judge Alito must address at his confirmation hearing. This Boston Globe article reports that Alito failed to recuse himself from a case in which his sister’s law firm represented a party.

In a written response to questions from the US Senate during his 1990 confirmation hearings to be an appeals judge, Samuel Alito promised: "I would disqualify myself from any case involving my sister's law firm, Carpenter, Bennett & Morrissey of Newark, New Jersey."

Rosemary Alito left the Carpenter firm in 1994, when she joined McCarter & English. That firm represented a bank seeking a rehearing before the Third Circuit. Court records indicate that Judge Alito didn’t recuse himself, but voted to deny the rehearing. Judge Alito says he doesn’t remember the case.

Alliance for Justice warns not to be fooled by the "Alito charm campaign" which is promoting Judge Alito's belief in stare decisis. It is no guarantee that he’ll follow it as a Supreme Court justice.

They have put together a document (pdf) showing what happened during Justice Thomas’s nomination process and what happened after he ascended to the High Court.

Judge Alito is making the rounds of Senators on the Judiciary Committee. Today, several senators expressed contentment with his answers about Roe v. Wade. They say he believes it is very strong precedent. Of course, that is no guarantee of how he would vote on the issue.

"He basically said ... that Roe was precedent on which people, a lot of people, relied, and had been precedent now for decades and therefore deserved great respect," [Joseph]Lieberman told reporters.

When will the Senators move on to ask questions about other issues? Half the cases before the Supreme Court are criminal cases. Why aren't the Senators asking him to demonstrate that he would be fair in deciding these cases despite having spent his entire career before becoming a judge as a prosecutor or attorney for the Government?

The National Law Journal today (free link) examines Judge Alito from a criminal defense perspective. There are several quotes from Law Prof Doug Berman of Sentencing Law and Policy.

Bottom line: Don't expect Alito to be another Earl Warren.

How do reporters know whom to call for information on Judge Alito? The professionals do their own research. Others apparently rely on the White House "Office of Political Affairs."

TalkLeft friend Peter Goldberger has given several press interviews on Alito, a law school classmate. He has expressed his views here on TalkLeft.

Yesterday, Peter got a telephone call from Mike Davis at the White House Political Affairs office asking whether he could put Peter's name on a contact list for journalists. Davis said they were looking for people who may not share Alito's views but who support his nomination.

Howard Bashman of How Appealing was on Radio Times the other day discussing Judge Alito's nomination. The audio is here.

During the segment, a caller who identified himself as a former law clerk for a 3rd Circuit Judge and a current law professor in Kentucky, noted that the judge he clerked for worked with Alito on a capital case in which Alito was in dissent. The caller said:

"It seemed like he put his thumb on the scale for the prosecution. ... He pored over the record to find facts and arguments the prosecution had never raised in its brief..."

The Philadelphia Inquirer has an article today about Judge Alito's rulings in death penalty cases. Frequent Talkleft commenter and appellate whiz Peter Goldberger, who went to law school with Alito and practices in the Third Circuit is quoted.

Lawyers familiar with the Third Circuit said that when it comes to death-penalty cases, Alito doesn't bend over backward to find errors just because it is a capital case - and he doesn't shy away from granting relief when he believes it is appropriate.

"He doesn't have a fixed opinion," lawyer Peter Goldberger said yesterday about how his former Yale Law classmate might view death-penalty cases if confirmed as a Supreme Court justice.