President Bush’s latest selection to fill a vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court is again drawing criticism and doubt among Democratic and left-wing opponents, despite the nominee’s 15 years in the federal court system and near-perfect record of arguing before the Supreme Court.
Samuel A. Alito Jr. was nominated Oct. 31, four days after Bush’s nominee Harriet Miers withdrew from the running, to replace Sandra Day O’Connor. O’Connor, who announced her retirement from the court on July 1, 2005, will not officially resign until a replacement is approved by the Senate.
As an adjunct professor at Seton Hall University School of Law, Alito has taught courses in constitutional law and a course on terrorism and civil liberties. He won the Saint Thomas More Medal for “his outstanding contributions to the field of law,” according to the school’s Web site.
Former President George H. W. Bush appointed the Italian immigrant and graduate of Princeton University and Yale Law School to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in 1990.
The Emerald asked University professors and students for their reactions to his nomination.
Clayton R. Hess Professor of Law Caroline Forell, a University faculty member since 1978 and co-author of “A Law of Her Own: The Reasonable Woman as a Measure of Man,” said she was disappointed because Alito brings no diversity to the court.
A supporter of gay rights and abortion rights, Forell said the Bush administration gave up on adding diversity to the court after nominating only one woman.
“Not to say he’s not qualified – he is – but a lot of other people are too,” she said. “I was just disappointed that the whole Harriet Miers thing was such a disaster.”
If Alito is approved by the Senate, he will be the 11th Catholic justice in the court’s history. Currently there are two Jewish judges, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, and two Protestants, John Paul Stevens and Sandra Day O’Connor. Catholics currently represent 24 percent of the U.S. population. Jews represent 2 percent and Protestants 45 percent, according to the American Religious Identification Survey by The City University of New York.
“He’s been a judge for a long time and I think he will fit in pretty well,” Forell said.
Frank Nash Professor of Law Jim O’Fallon, whose focus is constitutional law and theory, said he would prefer a less conservative judge on the court.
On the other hand, O’Fallon said, people look too much at people’s political philosophies.
“Politics overshadows that they’re judges interpreting the law,” he said.
O’Fallon said there are several examples in history where politically conservative people have turned out to be very good judges.
One example is Justice Harry A. Blackmun, who was appointed by President Richard Nixon for his conservatism, but eventually wrote the opinion for Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion. Alito’s decisions are more important than his political philosophy, O’Fallon said.
Senior Michele Reiling, a romance languages major, said she is waiting for the hearings before forming her opinion.
“The (Democrats) say this is terrible because a judge is supposed to be middle of the road,” she said. “(Alito) seems a lot better than Harriet Miers.”
University freshman Chris Moe said, “It seems the Supreme Court has turned into a puppet of the administration.”
“Hopefully it works out, but I’m a little scared,” he said.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to begin Alito’s hearings on Jan. 9.
Contact the campus and federal politics reporter at [email protected]
