News Intelligence Analysis





Battle for the Judiciary Directory



Section I: The Latest Articles on the Battle for the Judiciary

Section II: All About Judge Alito

Section III : See also the Cases of John G. Roberts and Complete New York Times Coverage



See also articles and documents in the
following Directories:

Law and Legal Issues

Battle for the Judiciary

Directory of the CIA Leak

Abu Ghraib Articles

Civil Rights Under Attack


Abuse Directory

Click Here for Washington Post Breaking News



The Working Elderly by K. Yurica




Section I: Latest Articles on the Battle for the Judiciary



NEW: The Court Under Siege
N.Y. Times Editorial
July 29, 2006

One big thing we’ve learned from watching
President Bush’s assault on the balance of
powers is that the federal courts are the only
line of defense. Congress not only lacks the
spine to stand up to Mr. Bush, but is usually
eager to accommodate him. So it is especially
frightening to see the administration use the
debates over the prisoners at Guantánamo Bay
and domestic spying to mount a new offensive
against the courts.



NEW: Roberts Dissent Reveals Strain
Beneath Court's Placid Surface
WASHINGTON, March 22 —
A Supreme Court decision on Wednesday in an
uncelebrated criminal case did more than resolve
a dispute over whether the police can search a
home without a warrant when one occupant gives
consent but another objects. More than any other
case so far, the decision, which answered that
question in the negative by a vote of 5 to 3, drew
back the curtain to reveal the strains behind the
surface placidity and collegiality of the young
Roberts court.



NEW: Sandra Day O'Connor Criticises
Republicans Who Criticize the
March 10, 2006

Katherine Yurica

Speaking at Georgetown University, former
Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
warned against the danger of a potential American
dictatorship that begins with intimidation of the
judiciary. Citing specific examples, without
naming either Tom Delay or Sen. John Cornyn,
both Repuplican critics of the courts and both
from Texas, she stated their attacks pose "a
direct threat to our constituional freedom."
Freedom is not possible without an independent
judiciary to protect individual rights she said.
O'Connor warned against "nakedly partisan



Senators in Need of a Spine
January 26, 2006
A New York Times Editorial
Judge Samuel Alito Jr., whose entire
history suggests that he holds extreme
views about the expansive powers of the
presidency and the limited role of Congress,
will almost certainly be a Supreme Court
justice soon. His elevation will come courtesy
of a president whose grandiose vision of his
own powers threatens to undermine the nation's
basic philosophy of government — and a Senate
that seems eager to cooperate by rolling over
and playing dead.



Tripping Up on Trips: Judges
Love Junkets as Much as Tom DeLay Does
I've been writing about the foibles of powerful
public officials for more years than I care to
reveal without a subpoena, and I still don't
get it: why would someone risk his or her
reputation and career for a lobbyist-bestowed
freebie like a vacation at a deluxe resort?



So Who Are the Activists? A
Study of the Court by Experts

July 6, 2005
Correction Appended
New Haven
WHEN Democrats or Republicans seek
to criticize judges or judicial nominees, they
often resort to the same language. They say
that the judge is "activist." But the word
"activist" is rarely defined. Often it simply
means that the judge makes decisions with
which the critic disagrees.



Justice Ginsburg affirmed her
belief in a constitutional right
to abortion during her 1993 confirmation
hearings. In a PDF file.



Lazarus wrote of lingering problems
with Roe v. Wade from the perspective
of one who believes the right to choose
is grounded elsewhere in the Constitution
instead of where Roe placed it.



The Ginsburg Fallacy
By Ruth Marcus
Tuesday, November 15, 2005

To hear some Republicans tell it, letting Ruth
Bader Ginsburg onto the Supreme Court was a
tough pill to swallow. She was an ACLU-loving,
bra-burning feminazi, but they supported her
anyway, dutifully respecting the president's right
to put his own stamp on the high court. Therefore,
Democrats now owe President Bush the same
deference when weighing his choice of Samuel Alito.


Court Weighs Girls' Access
to Abortion
The tribunal hears a case Wednesday on a
state's parental-notification law.
By Warren Richey
WASHINGTON - Wednesday the US Supreme Court
takes up a case that could change the abortion battle
in a fundamental way, potentially allowing state
lawmakers across the nation to enact more-restrictive
regulations on a woman's right to choose abortion.



Miers Withdraws Supreme Court
Conservative Republicans were among
those with concerns

Confronted with criticism from both the left and
right, Harriet Miers on Thursday withdrew her
nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.



Is Harriet Miers
'Unfit for Judging'?
October 4, 2005 - October 21, 2005

In an Explosive Series of Articles

By Jerome R. Corsi

Before Larry Littwin is subpoenaed to testify
before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Harriet
Miers should withdraw her nomination. If she does
not, the threat is that the Bush administration
may unravel before one year is complete in the
second term. Larry Littwin sits at the center the
Texas Lottery Commission scandals that Harriet
Miers has helped keep covered up for nearly
10 years. The moment Larry Littwin begins to
testify under oath, he is going to bring forward
a volume of detail and possibly even documents
that threaten to bring down the Bush presidency
itself. Make no mistake about it ? Larry Littwin is
the John Dean of the George W. Bush presidency.



Deferential Calculus

Charlottesville, Va.

But Chief Justice Roberts and Ms. Miers
may have more in common than you think.
Both their nominations reflect a deep concern
about a too-powerful court and the president's
troubling new hostility toward the institution.



Miers Is Asked to Redo Reply to


WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 - The Supreme
Court nomination of Harriet E. Miers
suffered another setback on Wednesday
when the Republican and Democratic
leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee
asked her to resubmit parts of her judicial
questionnaire, saying various members
had found her responses "inadequate," "
insufficient" and "insulting."



License to Torture


THE most profound issue that will face the
Supreme Court in the coming years is not
the one animating many of the conservatives
angry at Harriet Miers's nomination to the court,
abortion. It is presidential power.



The Faith-Based President Defrocked
October 9, 2005


TO understand why the right is rebelling
against Harriet Miers, don't waste time
boning up on her glory days with the Texas
Lottery Commission. The real story in this
dust-up is not the Supreme Court candidate,
but the man who picked her. The Miers
nomination, whatever its fate, will be
remembered as the flashpoint when the
faith-based Bush base finally started to lose
faith in our propaganda president and join
the apostate American majority.



Bush Nominates
Roberts as Chief Justice
of the Supreme Court

Eight Modest Questions for
Judge Roberts Not Answered:

Four from the New York Times
and Four from the Yurica Report

One Supreme Court justice can make a
huge difference in what kind of nation
America is. Consider Sandra Day O'Connor,
who in a series of 5-to-4 decisions cast the
deciding vote holding: (1) that the federal
government has broad power under the
Clean Air Act to fight air pollution; (2) that
states cannot impose new restrictions on
abortion rights; (3) that courthouses cannot
post the Ten Commandments; and (4) that
the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law
is constitutional. John Roberts, the appeals
court judge who is President Bush's nominee
to replace Justice O'Connor, could have an
equally powerful influence. As far as we know
right now, he could wipe away all of these
rulings and many more.



Fair Questions For Roberts

By Walter Dellinger

Why would it be inappropriate to know as
much about Roberts's views on controversial
legal issues as we know about Justice John
Paul Stevens's views? What is wrong with
asking a nominee whether he or she agrees
with Justice Antonin Scalia's dissenting
opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey
when we know that Scalia agrees with it
and Scalia will be able to take part in future
related cases without anyone suggesting
that to be a problem.



Senator Kennedy on:
Bush Nominates Roberts as
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
Over the last several weeks, we've begun
to review John Roberts record and overall
fitness to sit on the nation's highest court
in preparation for our hearings on his
nomination to be an Associate Justice
of the Supreme Court. Today, those
stakes became greater when the
President announced he would make
a new nomination of John Roberts to
be Chief Justice of the United States,
an even higher position.



A Court Choice Well Schooled in
Chief Justice Job's Pitfalls
WASHINGTON, Sept. 5 - As a Supreme Court
law clerk to William H. Rehnquist decades
ago, John G. Roberts Jr. learned how not
to be chief justice.




Religious Right Rally for
Justices: Leaders Ask for
Nominees Who Will End
Abortion and Gay Rights
By Thomas B. Edsall
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, August 15, 2005
Prominent conservative political and
religious leaders called Sunday night
for Senate approval of Supreme Court
nominees who will vote to end the
constitutional right to abortion, against
recognition of same-sex marriage and
for fewer restrictions on religious
expression in public places. The
Supreme Court has sanctioned "the right
to kill unborn children" and opened the
door to legalized "homosexual sodomy,"
declared Tony Perkins, president of the
Family Research Council, which
co-sponsored Justice Sunday II."




A Nomination, Not a Coronation

August 18, 2005
by Judd Legum, Faiz Shakir, Nico Pitney and
Christy Harvey
Several pieces of information have emerged
about Roberts over the last few days that
demand close attention by the Senate and
the public. First, we learned yesterday that
Roberts "was interviewing for a possible
Supreme Court nomination with top Bush
administration officials at the same time he
was presiding over a terrorism case of
significant importance to President Bush."



Religious Right Rally for
Justices:Leaders Ask for Nominees
Who Will End Abortion and Gay Rights
By Thomas B. Edsall
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, August 15, 2005
Prominent conservative political and religious
leaders called Sunday night for Senate approval
of Supreme Court nominees who will vote to
end the constitutional right to abortion, against
recognition of same-sex marriage and for fewer
restrictions on religious expression in public
places. The Supreme Court has sanctioned
"the right to kill unborn children" and opened the
door to legalized "homosexual sodomy," declared
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research
Council, which co-sponsored "Justice Sunday II."



Roberts Nomination Raises the
Issue of the Role of Religious Faith
in Public Life
Scarcely had Judge John G. Roberts been
chosen for the Supreme Court than religion
reared its lovely head. And just as swiftly,
opponents and supporters of the selection
traded accusations over who was responsible.




Gonzales Says Roe Can't
Bind Supreme Court
WASHINGTON, July 26 (AP) - A right to
abortion is settled law for lower courts, but
the Supreme Court "is not obliged to follow"
it, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales
said Tuesday as the Senate prepared to
consider the nomination of Judge John G.
Roberts to be associate justice.




Skirmish Over a Query About
Roberts's Faith

Published: July 26, 2005
WASHINGTON, July 25 - Congressional
Republicans warned Democrats on Monday
not to make Judge John G. Roberts's
Roman Catholic faith an issue in his
confirmation hearings for a seat on the
Supreme Court, reviving a politically potent
theme from previous battles over
judicial appointees.




Judge Roberts:
An Advocate for the Right

John G. Roberts, a young lawyer in the
Justice Department in 1981 and 1982 and
on the White House counsel's staff from
1982 to 1986, held positions too junior for
him to set policy in those days. But his
internal memorandums, some of which
have become public in recent days, reveal
a philosophy every bit as conservative as
that of the policy makers on the front lines
of the Reagan revolution



James Dobson Endorses
Judge Roberts: Why?
By Katherine Yurica
Posted July 23, 2005




Roberts Listed in Federalist Society
'97-98 Directory Court Nominee Said
He Has No Memory of Membership
By Charles Lane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 25, 2005; A01




Memo at Reagan Library
Sheds Light on Roberts's Civil
Rights Views
By Josh Gerstein
Staff Reporter of the Sun
July 22, 2005




Anti-Abortion Advocacy of Wife
of Court Nominee Draws Interest



James Dobson Is Happy With
Bush's Nominee John G. Roberts
Dobson keeps focus on the fight
Champion of Christian right sets his sights,
political clout on battle over courts




Rehnquist Denies
Rumor of Retirement

New York Times, Published:
July 15, 2005




The Not-So-Secret History of

EVERYONE recalls "Mr. Smith Goes to
Washington," but too few remember the
real-life Mrs. Smith. So, as the Senate
nears a vote on a proposal to unilaterally
change Senate rules for confirming federal
judges, I am reminded of the words spoken
55 years ago by Senator Margaret Chase
Smith of Maine in her famous "Declaration
of Conscience" against the tactics of Senator
Joe McCarthy, a member of her own party.



Pat Robertson Calls America's Judges Greater
Threat than Terrorists and Nazi Germany
On Sunday morning, [May 1, 2005] Christian Coalition founder
Pat Robertson told TV viewers nation-wide that the threat
posed by liberal judges is "probably more serious than a
few bearded terrorists who fly into buildings." When an
incredulous George Stephanopoulos asked if Robertson
really believed that these judges posed "the most serious
threat America has faced in nearly 400 years of history,
more serious than al Qaeda, more serious than Nazi
Germany and Japan, more serious than the Civil War?,"
he responded, "George, I really believe that."



Evangelicals Want to Strip Courts' Funds
Taped at a private conference, the leaders outline
ways to punish jurists they oppose.

By Peter Wallsten
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON — Evangelical Christian leaders, who
have been working closely with senior Republican
lawmakers to place conservative judges in the federal
courts, have also been exploring ways to punish sitting
jurists and even entire courts viewed as hostile to
their cause.



Bill Frist's Religious War
A New York Times Editorial

Right-wing Christian groups and the Republican
politicians they bankroll have done much since the
last election to impose their particular religious views
on all Americans. But nothing comes close to the
shameful declaration of religious war by Bill Frist,
the Senate majority leader, over the selection of judges
for federal courts.



Frist Accused of Exploiting Religion Issue

Democratic senators accused Senator Bill Frist,
the Republican majority leader, of exploiting religion
for partisan ends by taking part in a telecast
portraying them as "against people of faith" for
blocking President Bush's judicial nominations.



Frist Set to Use Religious Stage
on Judicial Issue

WASHINGTON, April 14 - As the Senate heads
toward a showdown over the rules governing judicial
confirmations, Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader,
has agreed to join a handful of prominent Christian
conservatives in a telecast portraying Democrats as
"against people of faith" for blocking President Bush's



Attacking a Free Judiciary
A New York Times Editorial

The low point in the politicking over Terri
Schiavo came last week when the House
majority leader, Tom DeLay, threatened the
judges who ruled in her case. Saying they
had "thumbed their nose at Congress and
the president," Mr. DeLay announced that
"the time will come for the men responsible
for this to answer for their behavior, but
not today."



Majority Leader Asks House Panel
to Review Judges

WASHINGTON, April 13 - Deflecting all questions
about his ethical conduct and political future,
Representative Tom DeLay, the House majority
leader, on Wednesday stepped up his crusade
against judges, announcing that he had instructed
the Judiciary Committee to investigate federal
court decisions in the Terri Schiavo case and
recommend possible legislation.



DeLay Says Federal Judiciary
Has 'Run Amok,'

WASHINGTON, April 7 - Representative Tom
DeLay, the House majority leader, escalated
his talk of a battle between the legislative and
judicial branches of government on Thursday,
saying federal courts had "run amok," in large
part because of the failure of Congress to confront
them. "Judicial independence does not equal
judicial supremacy," Mr. DeLay said in a videotaped
speech delivered to a conservative conference in
Washington entitled "Confronting the Judicial
War on Faith."



The Judges Made Them Do It
A New York Times Editorial

It was appalling when the House majority leader
threatened political retribution against judges who
did not toe his extremist political line. But when a
second important Republican stands up and
excuses murderous violence against judges as an
understandable reaction to their decisions, then it
is time to get really scared.




Congressman Conyers rips Senator
Cornyn for justifying violence
against judges
by John in DC - 4/4/2005

During the protracted coverage and debate of the
Schiavo matter, I was struck by the disrespectful
and reckless language being used against judges.
One by one, my Republican colleagues took the
House floor to attack judges as "unconscionable,"
lacking "human compassion," needing to be held in
"contempt," and having "answering to do." I remember
thinking that such dehumanizing rhetoric is especially
dangerous in these times towards anyone, let alone



In Courts, Threats Become Alarming
Fact of Life

Last March, a federal prosecutor in Utah overseeing
a racketeering case against a dozen members of the
Soldiers of Aryan Culture received a chilling threat.
"You stupid bitch!" the letter to the assistant United
States attorney, who is an African-American woman,
began. "It is because of you that my brothers are in jail."
The letter went on to mention the prosecutor's home
address, concluding, "We will get you." It was signed, "
Till the casket drops."



Federal Judge Condemns Congress'
Intervention in Schiavo Case

PINELLAS PARK, Fla., March 30 - A federal appeals court
in Atlanta refused Wednesday to reconsider the case of Terri
Schiavo, with one of the judges rebuking President Bush and
Congress for acting "in a manner demonstrably at odds with
our founding fathers' blueprint for the governance of a free



Split Panel Sends Renominated Candidate
to Full Senate

WASHINGTON, March 17 - Voting along strict party lines,
the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the first of
President Bush's appeals court nominees on Thursday,
hastening the Senate's march to a large-scale partisan



Rehnquist Resumes His Call for Judicial

WASHINGTON, Dec. 31 - Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist,
delivering his 19th and most likely his last year-end report on
the federal judiciary, returned on Friday to one of his longtime
themes: a need to safeguard the independence of federal
judges from intrusive Congressional oversight. Criticism of
judges and their decisions "is as old as our Republic" and
can be a healthy part of the balance of power between the
branches, the chief justice said in remarks issued by the
court's press office. But he added that criticism from Congress
had "in the eyes of some taken a new turn in recent years" -
an oblique locution that nonetheless left no doubt that he
himself was among those discerning a new and disturbing
twist to the attacks.



Activist, Schmactivist
August 15, 2004
We can disagree about outcomes, but we have, at
least as a matter of political language, internalized
the fiction that liberal judges "make" law, while
conservative judges "interpret" it.



Courts may be stripped on pledge
By Alexander Bolton

The House Judiciary Committee yesterday voted along
party lines to eradicate the power of federal courts —
including the Supreme Court — to alter the Pledge of
Allegiance. The Republican leadership has promised to
bring the highly-charged legislation up for a vote on the
House floor and is expected to do so next week.



Chief Justice Attacks a Law as Infringing
on Judges
WASHINGTON, Dec. 31 — Chief Justice William H.
Rehnquist criticized Congress in unusually pointed
terms on Wednesday for a recent law that places
federal judges under special scrutiny for sentences
that fall short of those called for by the federal
sentencing guidelines.



Rehnquist to DeLay:
Bug off on judges
San Antonio Express-News



Same Justices, New Court

The change was most evident in the term’s closing
days, in the cases the court decided on the rights
of the detainees labeled enemy combatants by the
Bush administration. The court ruled that foreigners
imprisoned at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, as well as
American citizens held in the United States are
entitled to contest their
classification before an
impartial judge



Debasing the Constitution

Mr. Bush has abandoned nuance. A federal definition
of marriage, which has been governed primarily by
state law since the beginning, would prevent any state,
whatever the views of its residents, from recognizing the
equality and legitimacy of same-sex marriages.



An Injudicious Nominee

If the president is intent on stocking the federal courts
with ideologues, Mr. Haynes meets that standard.
But senators should demand that judicial nominees
have a deep background in the law, the respect of
their profession and a proven record of supporting
important constitutional principles.









Who To Contact:
United States Senate Committee
on the Judiciary

Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights

Jurisdiction: (1) Constitutional amendments;
(2) Civil rights oversight; (3) Property rights;
(4) Federal-State relations; (5) Individual rights;
(6) Commemorative Congressional Resolutions;
and (6) Interstate compacts.




Section II.

All About Judge Alito


See the References to Samuel Alito
and Complete
New York Times Coverage

"Judge Alito was the lone judge voting to uphold the
illegal strip-search of a
10-year old girl."


The Revealing Transcripts of Judge
Alito's Hearings that Expose His Extremism,
and Questions About His Honesty:


Day One: Opening Statements
January 9, 2006
Part I.

Part II.

Day Two: January 10, 2006
Part I.

Part II.
Part III.

Day Three: January 11, 2006
Part I.

Part II.
Part III.

Day Four: January 12, 2006
Part I.

Part II.
Part III.


1. Alito: Preliminary Report by
People for the American Way. PDF

2. Alito: Preliminary Report by
Supreme Court Watch PDF

3. Links to All Judge Alito's Dissents

4. Judge Alito's Dissent on Abortion

5. Dia v. Ashcroft: Judge Alito's Dissent

Two Documents Judge Alito Wrote:

6. The Released Time Cases Revisited: A Study of
Group Decisionmaking by the Supreme Court" PDF

7. Documents and the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination" PDF

8. Records Relating to Judge Samuel Alito

9. Which Side Was He On?
During his 15 years as a judge on the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, Samuel A. Alito Jr. helped
to decide 221 cases on which the court's opinion was
divided. To shed light on Alito's views, The Washington
Post reviewed these non-unanimous cases, divided
them into categories and compared them with a
sample of other federal appellate judges around the
country. The figures below show which side he voted
for in the different kinds of cases, how often he voted
with the court majority and how his views stack up

against judges nationally.

10. Washington Post list of 221 Alito cases analyzed
with citations.


11. Samuel A. Alito's Completed Senate
Judiciary Committee Questionaire. PDF 2006


1. Question 13.d

2. Question 14.b

3. Question 17. a-e

4. Question 23.c
Judge Alito's Recusual List

Senate Judiciary Committee's
original questionaire to Judge

See also the Cases of John G. Roberts
and Complete
New York Times Coverage


Important Articles on Judge Alito:


Has Judge Alito Violated His Oath
of Office?
And Is There a Legal Tie-in Between
Abortion and Corporate Power in
the U.S.?

By Katherine Yurica.
November 11, 2005
In 1995 Jonathan Harr published his legal thriller,
A Civil Action, which quickly shot up to bestseller
status as readers agreed with John Grisham’s
statement on the book: He found it to be the most
compelling chronicle of litigation he had ever read.
However, this was not a Grisham thriller, the events
in the book were real. In 1999, John Travolta played
the part of Jan Schlichtmann, the courageous lawyer
who took on the Beatrice Foods and W. R. Grace
companies for allegedly dumping poisonous chemicals
into the drinking water of a small Massachusetts town.
If you read the book or saw the movie, the Woburn
case is almost impossible to forget.


Judge Alito Has Paper
Trail Favoring Big Businesses

Has He Violated His Oath?
New York Times


WASHINGTON, Nov. 4 - Judge Samuel A.
Alito Jr. has reliably favored big-business
litigants as he has pushed the federal appeals
court in Philadelphia in a conservative direction.
His extensive paper trail of 15 years of
opinions reveals a jurist deeply skeptical
of claims against large corporations.


Alito Thank-You Letter To Religious
Right Leader Is Grossly Inappropriate,
Says Americans United
New High Court Justice Should Follow
Command Of Constitution, Not Dobson, Asserts
Church-State Watchdog Group
Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito has sent a
cloying thank-you note to Focus on the Family head
James C. Dobson, a move Americans United for
Separation of Church and State says is further
evidence the new justice is firmly in the pocket
of the Religious Right.



In Alito, G.O.P. Reaps Harvest
Planted in '82

Last February, as rumors swirled about
the failing health of Chief Justice William H.
Rehnquist, a team of conservative grass-
roots organizers, public relations specialists
and legal strategists met to prepare a battle
plan to ensure any vacancies were filled by
like-minded jurists.


Alito Hearings Unsettle Some
Prevailing Wisdom About the
Politics of Abortion
WASHINGTON, Jan. 15 - Just a little over
a year ago, senators of both parties said
publicly that it would be almost impossible
or a Supreme Court nominee who disagreed
openly with the major abortion rights precedents
to win confirmation. But partisans on either
side now say that last week's confirmation
hearings for Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. cast
doubt on such assumptions.


Judge Alito, in His Own Words
January 12, 2006
A New York Times Editorial
Some commentators are complaining that J
udge Samuel Alito Jr.'s confirmation hearings
have not been exciting, but they must not have
been paying attention. We learned that Judge Alito
had once declared that Judge Robert Bork - whose
Supreme Court nomination was defeated because
of his legal extremism - "was one of the most
outstanding nominees" of the 20th century. We
heard Judge Alito refuse to call Roe v. Wade
"settled law," as Chief Justice John Roberts did
at his confirmation hearings. And we learned that
Judge Alito subscribes to troubling views about
presidential power.



Alito Aligned with Scalia
and Thomas
WASHINGTON, Jan. 12 - In over 18 hours
responding to some 700 questions at his Supreme
Court confirmation hearings before the Senate
Judiciary Committee, Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr.
mostly described a methodical and incremental
approach to the law rooted in no particular theory.
But to the extent Judge Alito claimed a judicial
philosophy, it aligned him with the court's two
most conservative members, Justices Antonin
Scalia and Clarence Thomas.



Judging Samuel Alito
Judicial nominations are not always
motivated by ideology, but the
nomination of Judge Samuel Alito
certainly was. President Bush's
revious choice to fill Justice Sandra
Day O'Connor's seat on the Supreme
Court, Harriet Miers, was hounded
into withdrawing by the far right,
primarily because she appeared to
hold moderate views on a variety of
legal issues. President Bush placated
Ms. Miers's conservative critics by
nominating Judge Alito, who has
long been one of their favorites.



Thirty Questions for Alito
from six distinguished lawyers
alternating between right-wing
and progressive concerns.
From the New York Times



Top Alito Myths and Falsehoods

With Senate Judiciary Committee hearings for Supreme
Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr. scheduled to begin on
January 9, the media are again turning their attention to
the heated battle over the high court. Media Matters has
compiled the top myths and falsehoods advanced by
conservatives and Alito supporters -- and often repeated
in the mainstream media -- that effectively obscure his
record and distort concerns and questions raised by
his critics.


Questionaire Alito submitted to the Senate
during his 1990 confirmation. PDF



From Alito's Past, a Window on
Conservatives at Princeton
WASHINGTON, Nov. 26 - In the fall of 1985,
Concerned Alumni of Princeton was entering a
crisis. The group had been founded in 1972, the
year that Judge Alito graduated, by alumni upset
that Princeton had recently begun admitting women.
It published a magazine, Prospect, which persistently
accused the administration of taking a permissive
approach to student life, of promoting birth control
and paying for abortions, and of diluting the explicitly
Christian character of the school.



Alito Participated in 2002 Vanguard
Case Despite Promise to Recuse
By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 1, 2005
When Samuel A. Alito Jr. appeared before the
Senate Judiciary Committee 15 years ago as a
nominee for the appellate bench, he promised in
writing to disqualify himself from "any cases
involving the Vanguard companies," a stock and
mutual fund firm in which he had substantial
personal investments.


Democrats Query Nominee On Ethics
At Issue Is Alito's Failure to Recuse
Himself Twice
By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, November 10, 2005
Senate Democrats are pressing Supreme
Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr. about his
rulings on cases that involved financial
companies in which he had investments, a
sign that ethics questions may play a role
in his confirmation hearing.




NEW: Question for Judge Alito: What
About One Person One Vote?
When Samuel Alito Jr. applied for a top job
in the Reagan Justice Department, he explained
what had attracted him to constitutional law
as a college student. He was motivated, he
said, "in large part by disagreement with
Warren Court decisions, particularly in the
areas of criminal procedure, the Establishment
Clause, and reapportionment." The reapportionment
cases that so upset young Mr. Alito were a series
of landmark decisions that established a principle
that is now a cornerstone of American democracy:
one person one vote.



Hazard Letter to Senator Specter on
Judge Alito in a PDF file.



Alito, In and Out of the Mainstream

By Amy Goldstein and Sarah Cohen
Sunday, January 1, 2006
During 15 years as an appeals court judge,
Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr.
has been highly sympathetic to prosecutors,
skeptical of immigrants trying to avoid deportation,
and supportive of a lower wall between church
and state, according to an analysis of his
record by The Washington Post.



From Alito's Past, a Window on
Conservatives at Princeton
WASHINGTON, Nov. 26 - In the fall of
1985, Concerned Alumni of Princeton was
entering a crisis...The group had been
founded in 1972, the year that Judge Alito
graduated, by alumni upset that Princeton
had recently begun admitting women. It
published a magazine, Prospect, which
persistently accused the administration of
taking a permissive approach to student
life, of promoting birth control and paying
for abortions, and of diluting the explicitly
Christian character of the school.


Alito's Zeal for Presidential

With the Bush administration claiming sweeping
and often legally baseless authority to detain and
spy on people, judges play a crucial role in
underscoring the limits of presidential power.
When the Senate begins hearings next month
on Judge Samuel Alito, President Bush's Supreme
Court nominee, it should explore whether he
understands where the Constitution sets those
limits. New documents released yesterday provide
more evidence that Judge Alito has a skewed view
of the allocation of power among the three branches -
skewed in favor of presidential power.



Alito Memo in '84 Favored
Immunity for Top Officials

The attorney general should be immune from
lawsuits for ordering wiretaps of Americans
without permission from a court, Samuel A.
Alito Jr., President Bush's Supreme Court
nominee, wrote in a memorandum in 1984
as a government lawyer in the Reagan


Alito Helped Craft Reagan-Era
Move To Restrict 'Roe'
Supreme Court Nominee Wrote Memo
In 1985 as Justice Department Lawyer
By Amy Goldstein and Jo Becker
Washington Post Staff Writers
December 1, 2005

As a Justice Department lawyer in the Reagan
administration, Supreme Court nominee Samuel
A. Alito Jr. helped devise a legal strategy to
persuade the high court to restrict and eventually
overturn Roe v. Wade, the historic decision
legalizing abortion.



In Criminal Cases, Alito Rules
Against Defendants
If Samuel A. Alito Jr. had been on the
Supreme Court back in January, Ronald
Rompilla might well be a dead man. That
month the Supreme Court heard an appeal
of a decision, written by Judge Alito for a
panel of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals,
that upheld Mr. Rompilla's sentence for a
murder committed in 1988. The Supreme
Court, finding that Mr. Rompilla's lawyers
had been ineffective representatives at trial,
later reversed the ruling in a 5-to-4 vote.


Alito Often Ruled for Religious

During his 15 years sitting in Newark as a
member of a federal appeals court, Judge
Alito has sided almost uniformly with those
who have complained vigorously in recent
years that zealousness in enforcing the
Constitution's separation of church and
state has unfairly inhibited religious practices.




Alito Described View on Abortion
in '85 Document

WASHINGTON, Nov. 14 - As a young lawyer
seeking to move up in the Reagan administration
in 1985, Samuel A. Alito Jr. declared that the
Constitution does not protect a right to abortion.
In language certain to stoke heated debate at
his January confirmation hearings, Mr. Alito,
now President Bush's nominee for the Supreme
Court, also expressed disapproval of Supreme
Court decisions while Earl Warren was chief
justice, including those that dealt with criminal



NYT Urges Democrats to Be
Wary of Judge Alito
November 13, 2005
The Alito nomination is a defining moment
for the country, and for the Democratic Party.
Given the sharp divisions on the court, the
next justice could decide the scope of
reproductive freedom, civil rights and civil
liberties, and environmental and workplace
protections that Americans will live with
for years. Although many questions remain
to be answered, there is reason to believe
that Judge Alito could do significant damage
to values Democrats have long stood for.




Yale Law Frets Over Court Choices
It Knows Best
NEW HAVEN, Nov. 8 - The morning after Judge
Samuel A. Alito Jr. was announced as the president's
choice for the Supreme Court, some students and
professors at his alma mater, the Yale Law School,
were already hard at work - to defeat him. Professor
Bruce Ackerman, who teaches constitutional law here,
appeared on CNN with this instant assessment: "I don't
think conservative is the word. This person is a judicial




Alito Defends His Actions In Two
Appeals Court Cases
In Letter to Senators, Nominee Denies
Conflict of Interest
By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, November 11, 2005; A02

Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr.
said yesterday that he did nothing improper
when he ruled in cases involving two financial
firms in which he held accounts, although he
had told the Senate 15 years ago that he would
step aside in matters involving the companies.



CNN's O'Brien Downplays Alito
Violation of His Sworn
Promise to Recuse Himself
from Vanguard Cases
While serving on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals, current Supreme Court nominee
Samuel Alito issued rulings in cases involving
two financial companies with which he held




A Conservative Analyzes
Judge Alito's Analysis of
The Released Time Cases Re-

By: Dales · Section: SCOTUS

When trying to discern what sort of Supreme
Court Justice a nominee might make, I put
particular stock in their writings outside of the
realm of court opinions and legal briefs. A lower
court Justice is bound to follow the precedents
of the Supreme Court; how a particular Justice
performs this task may or may not demonstrate
how the Justice would steer the Supreme Court
on a particular matter. An attorney arguing a case
will adopt the arguments that advance the cause
of their client; this tells one nothing about if the
advocate would find the arguments compelling if
seated on the Court. Other writings offer a better
glimpse at the true perspectives of the author.
With this in mind, I reviewed The Released Time
Cases Revisited: A Study of Group Decisionmaking
by the Supreme Court", a 1974 article by current
Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito, Jr. The
article provides some welcome clues as to the type
of decision Alito finds problematic, as well as hints
to the limitations he would put on considering the
precedents from previous Supreme Court rulings.


Another Conservative Analyzes
Scalito and the Founding Fathers:
why he supports original intent and why
this threatens Roe

by Grenfell Hunt

There's no question but the party of the elephants
is feeling very good right now about the future Mr Justice
Alito. After the searing weeks of the Miers affair, the
party is all but fully re-united and proud once again
of their president. Whatever one might think of their
judicial philosophies, there's no question but that
John Roberts and Samuel Alito are two consummately
well-qualified jurists.




Abortion Case From 1991 May
Be Central in Confirmation

The 1991 abortion case on which the
confirmation of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr.
to the Supreme Court may hinge arrived
at his Philadelphia-based federal appeals
court at a moment of great ferment in the
development of abortion law...But on one
important point, a requirement that a married
woman notify her husband before obtaining
an abortion, Judge Alito found himself at
odds with his two colleagues, and ultimately
with the Supreme Court's ruling, which
sparked a debate on the high court that
remains unresolved today.


The Alito Nomination

Alexander Cockburn
November 2, 2005

Let's hear it for Protestant fundamentalists
(American variety) yet again. Was there ever a
more pragmatic bunch? After centuries of howling
No Popery and denouncing the Whore of Rome,
they're now trying to give us a U.S. Supreme Court
that will, in the probable event of Samuel Alito's
confirmation, boast no less than five Roman Catholics,
a clear majority -- in order of arrival on the bench:
Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas,
John Roberts and, most likely, Alito.

You can see why the conservative Christians don't
trust Protestants when it comes to matters of Choice
or any of their other cherished issues. The two Protestants
on the Supreme Court are the justices they hate most: a
liberal Republican, John Stevens and a libertarian,
David Souter.



A Look at Alito's Legal Career


Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. has a long record of rulings
on highly charged issues from abortion to the First
Amendment as a member of the United States Court
of Appeals for the Third Circuit. ..But Judge Alito broke
with the majority in asserting that Pennsylvania could
also require women to notify their husbands
before having abortions.


A Fight the White House
Believes It Can Win


WASHINGTON, Oct. 31 - The nomination of Judge
Samuel A. Alito Jr. to the Supreme Court has given
President Bush's conservative backers and liberal
opponents just the battle they wanted.



Bush 'Picks Judge for Top Court'

President George W Bush will nominate
federal appeals court judge Samuel Alito
to the US Supreme Court on Monday, US
media reports say.

Mr Alito has a long judicial record and is seen
as a staunch conservative.




Back to Top


Send a letter 
to the editor 
about this page




Back to The Yurica Report Home Page

Copyright © 2005 Yurica Report. All rights reserved.