Senators' grilling, views of Alito split on party lines
'He's as good as it gets,' Hatch says, but Demos aren't swayed
And reviews of his performance on the second day of his confirmation hearing were split along party lines.
Republicans recognized Alito's "integrity" and that he was "very forthcoming" in his answers, while Democrats criticized him for being too vague and offering conflicting statements from what he has said on the same issues in the past.
"He's as good as it gets," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. "I've been impressed so far. This is a middle-class kid who made good."
Hatch said that in Alito's 15 years on the Appeals Court, he has probably participated in 5,000 cases.
"I don't know a judge alive who's been on the bench 15 years that doesn't have cases that some of our illustrious members disagree with," Hatch said.
But Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said Alito's answers were only "broad generalities" and that they know nothing more about him that they did before the hearing began Monday.
"This is not an anointment, we have a long way to go," Schumer said.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., started the questioning by asking Alito about abortion. Alito made a statement in 1985 that the Constitution does not provide a basis for a woman's right to an abortion, while the Supreme Court has reaffirmed Roe v. Wade, which for decades has recognized a woman's right to choose an abortion.
"That was a correct statement of what I thought in 1985 from my vantage point in 1985, and that was as a line attorney in the Department of Justice in the Reagan administration," Alito said. "That was a statement that I made at a prior period of time when I was performing a different role.
"And as I said yesterday, when someone becomes a judge, you really have to put aside the things that you did as a lawyer at prior points in your legal career and think about legal issues the way a judge thinks about legal issues."
Alito said if confirmed and the issue came before him, he would approach it with "an open mind."
Specter asked Alito about "stare decisis," a legal term that means "to stand by that which is decided" or that precedent decisions should be followed by the courts. Specter quoted other judges who called the 1992 Supreme Court decision in Casey v. Planned Parenthood, which reaffirmed Roe v. Wade, a "super-precedent."
Alito said he "would not get into categorizing precedents as super-precedents or super- duper precedents."
"Any sort of categorization like that sort of reminds me of the size of the laundry detergent in the supermarket," Alito said. "I think that when a precedent is reaffirmed, each time it's reaffirmed that is a factor that should be taken into account in making the judgment about stare decisis."
You can be the first to comment on this story.