On Alito

There is a strong argument to be made for confimring Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court of the United States:

-He is quite qualified to sit on the high bench - way more so than Harriet Miers and even John Roberts;
-While he is not someone I would have nominated, my candidate didn't win the last presidential election;
-Despite their personal disdain for President Clinton, an overwhelming number of Republicans voted to confrim his two choices for the Court (although it should be noted that in the later years of the Clinton presidency, the GOP-led Senate delayed confirmation of many his nominees to the lower federal courts).

Yet despite those arguments, I have to throw my support for the Alito nomination behind those who would vote against his confirmation.

While I came out against the nomination of Harriet Miers due to her overall lack of judicial experience and her limited grasp of Constitutional law, I was afraid I might come across as a hypocrite if I immediately criticized Judge Alito. Believe me, in my mind it's a close call.

But since 1995, when the Republicans took control of the Senate, their Congressional leaders and presidential candidates have rallied against "activist judges" who wish to "legislate" from the bench. That argument works both ways and in Judge Alito we have a radical right jurist whose previous writings and rulings lead me to believe that he would "legislate" from the high court. His backers are hopeful that he would vote to overturn precedent and the President is depending on Alito's apparent support for unchecked executive power.

Because he is an activist judge; because his radical views are dangerous to the future of the Constitution; I urge the Senate to reject Samual Alito's nomination.