The Alito Confirmation Hearings: Day 4

I listened to as much of the confirmation hearings as I could yesterday—all of the morning session and most of the afternoon. I saw the same thing as I’ve seen in the preceding three days: a candidate giving straightforward, procedural answers; Democrats desperately looking for a smoking gun; Republicans putting out banal platitudes, often in disingenously cornpone terms.

That appears to be the what the Associated Press saw, too:

WASHINGTON (AP) – Samuel Alito’s nomination to the Supreme Court is gliding toward confirmation despite a week of hearings in which Democrats tried and failed to hobble his prospects with withering questions on abortion, presidential power and ethics.

Democrats argue that the former Reagan administration lawyer is likely to tip the court’s balance to the right in replacing centrist Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. But with little success so far peeling votes from Alito’s confirmation as the nation’s 110th Supreme Court justice, Democrats showed not much appetite for mounting a filibuster on the Senate floor.

Instead, they are seeking to slow Alito’s ascension by demanding that the Judiciary Committee’s chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., delay the panel’s vote a week.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid “is urging all Democrats to refrain from committing to a vote either for or against confirmation prior to the caucus next Wednesday,” Reid spokesman Jim Manley said.

Specter, who had wanted a committee vote next Tuesday, told reporters Thursday night that the date of a vote was up in the air. “It’s been very hard to get a focus on that,” he said.

Democrats want to give their caucus time to study the hearing transcripts, Manley said. Also to be considered is whether any reason exists to filibuster the nomination, but the chances of a filibuster happening appeared slim.

“I don’t think he’s going to get many votes from Democrats on the committee,” Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat on the committee, told CBS'”The Early Show.””As for a filibuster, it’s something we’ll have to discuss. So it’s not on the table or off the table right now.”

Any delay would do little to whittle support for Alito’s confirmation.

GOP senators, both on and off the committee, praised Alito, who has been a federal appeals court judge for the past 15 years, as his testimony ended Thursday.

The afternoon session included testimony by representatives of the American Bar Association and sitting members of the Third Circuit, many with impeccable Democratic credentials. The picture they painted of Samuel Alito was consistently of a man who had left politics at the courthouse door and decided cases, to the best of his ability, in accordance with the law.

I suppose my reactions might be characterized as “drinking the Republican Kool-Aid” by “progressive” Democrats. To those who are afraid an Associate Justice Alito will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, I suggest you count the votes. Currently I only see two votes to overturn: Scalia and Thomas. If Alito were to vote to overturn, that would make three.

But from what I’ve heard in the hearings I doubt that Alito would vote to overturn Roe although I wouldn’t be surprised if Alito voted to overturn some of the decisions based on Roe that have come down over the years.

For those who are concerned that Alito’s rulings have disparately benefited the government, large corporations, and the rich and powerful at the expense of private individuals, women, and minorities, I believe that your concern is legitimate but that the focus of the complaint is misplaced. What we’ve seen in the last few days and heard in the testimony of his colleagues is a justice who rules in favor of the government, large corporations, and the rich and powerful when that is what the law requires. We should look to the legislature and change the laws.

Meanwhile so far we do not have a picture of Alito as a dangerous radical but a rather dull, competent, well, judge. At this point it appears that he’ll be confirmed. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a renewal of interest in term limits for U. S. Senators.