Much to his surprise, University President Dave Frohnmayer argued before the U.S. Supreme Court with a judge now finishing his confirmation hearings as a potential replacement for retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. The 1982 case, Oregon v. Kennedy, dealt with whether a defendant in a criminal case can be retried following a mistrial.
“I had to be reminded that (Samuel) Alito argued with me. I didn’t remember it was Alito until a student of mine returning back from (Washington) D.C. told me,” Frohnmayer said.
Confirmation hearings for President Bush’s Supreme Court justice nominee Samuel Alito are coming to an end.
The U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, which conducts the hearings prior to the confirmation of federal judges, will vote on Alito today. The full Senate will vote Wednesday.
The 1982 case was the first time Frohnmayer, who was then Oregon Attorney General, appeared before the Supreme Court. All told, he argued seven cases there, winning six of them, including Oregon v. Kennedy.
“Alito came, as I said, hot out of the box,” Frohnmayer said. “He was very well-prepared.”
Frohnmayer said he couldn’t say whether he thought Alito is well-qualified for a Supreme Court justice position based on his experience working with the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judge, but he did say Alito “did the job he needed to do.”

“I think I can say what I observed, which is that he did a very thorough job. He was very intelligent, conscientious, well-prepared and did a good job in a constitutional case,” Frohnmayer said.
Alito, 55, is currently entering his 16th year as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals. He is the second presidential nomination to replace O’Connor, and Bush’s third nomination to the court. The Senate confirmed John Roberts Jr. on Sept. 29.
Oregon Senators Gordon Smith, a Republican, and Ron Wyden, a Democrat, have differing views about Alito.
At a town meeting in Eugene on Jan. 13, Wyden said Alito’s intelligence, integrity and his ability not to pre-judge issues would be the determining factors for Wyden’s vote. Two days after meeting with Alito on Jan. 18, Wyden said in a statement that Alito does not fulfill all of the senator’s requirements, despite his two-decade record of federal service.
“At this time when a country so desperately needs a judge who will approach issues with a sense of neutrality, Judge Alito leaves me unconvinced that he will bring an impartial viewpoint to the nation’s highest court,” the statement read.
Wyden stated Alito was highly intelligent, but his view on the amount of power the president has “would undermine our proven and constitutionally mandated system of checks and balances.”
“Ultimately, it is Judge Alito’s record that leaves me convinced he has pre-judged many of the matters that would come before him on the court,” Wyden stated.
Smith said after his meeting with the nominee that he was very impressed and that Alito reminded him of Roberts, whom Smith voted for in September.
“He is supremely qualified, very candid, very clear in his explanations and barring something unforeseen between now and the vote on Senate floor, I anticipate voting for his confirmation,” Smith told The Associated Press.
Contact the campus and federal politics reporter at [email protected]