The following are lines you will never hear uttered at a Supreme Court nomination hearing: 'I believe anyone who committed a heinous crime should be stoned to death' and 'Abortion? No way. It goes against every Christian and moral obligation I hold; pro-life baby.'
At this point in our political history, we are growing continually preoccupied with public appearance and, as a result, are experiencing a polarization of the elites. No nominee is going to openly take one side or the other while under the lights of hundreds of cameras and millions of eyes.
Because the dichotomy of red and blue does exists among our political leaders, it becomes necessary to continue that dichotomy in all subsequent decisions.
Chief Justice John Roberts had his chance to stare, starry eyed, up at Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and the rest of the Senate Judiciary Committee and go through scrutiny under the gaze of the entire Senate; now its Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito's turn.
After being confirmed by the committee of 18 senators (10-8, as we all knew it would go), it is expected that the full floor will do the same today. However, this does not excuse the weeks of worthless debate.
A man with a formidable record of 221 written opinions in federal cases on which the court was divided'ranging from the hotly contested abortion to immigration'and the most innovative statement we have heard from him during these confirmation hearings has been, 'I would address that issue [whether the constitution protects the right to an abortion] in accordance with the judicial process as I understand it, and as I have practiced it. That's the only way I can answer that question.' Wow. This was not informing at all.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-NY, went on to ask the same question seven times before conceding that the only answer he would get was a non-answer. The entire week of hearings was one big non-answer.
The confirmation hearings were turned into a Stepford Wife, 'Hello, how are you? How's your family? Hello, how are you? How's your family'? As a nation, we must acknowledge the fact that a week of televised formalities may not be the most productive way to decide a person's qualifications for representing 295 million people.
The full debate was not much better, proving to be nothing more than a long list of snide comments passed across the aisle.
Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass, said Wednesday that, 'Today, we have a president who believes torture can be an acceptable practice, despite laws and treaties that explicitly prohibit it. We have a president who claims the power to arrest American citizens on American soil, and jail them for years without access to counsel or the courts. We have a president who claims he has the authority to spy on Americans without the court order required by law ... Judge Alito refused to discuss his current view of the constitutional limits on presidential power.'
Republicans were not much better, taking every opportunity to praise President Bush and Alito's judicial record.
It is no secret that Justice Alito, if confirmed, holds the key to one of the most powerful positions in the country'the swing vote on the Supreme Court. It is also true that Alito will not act as a Justice Sandra Day O'Connor clone. The goal instead, is to figure out what kind of Supreme Court Justice he would be, a fact that the hearings have failed to spell out.
A person's record should speak for itself. It is rare that a person who holds the same views his whole life, with several written opinions reaffirming them, would one day turn around and change to the complete opposite ideology.
If Alito wrote at one point that he believed that the Constitution did not protect a right to an abortion'which he did, in 1985'chances are he did not change his mind yet. The Constitution is not interpreted on a day-to-day basis. Bush would not want it to'he swore to only pick nominees that he believed held an unwavering judicial philosophy.
Sen. Russ Feingold wrote that his decision to vote 'no' on Alito's confirmation had much to do with a displeasing judicial record.
The confirmation hearings continue to be, with where we stand now as an image-obsessed nation, completely pointless; nothing new is said. An absence of substance and lack of illumination on any issue sums up the lines of questioning that several senators confessed to falling asleep during.
A nominee deserves to be judged based on his or her record alone. The confirmation hearings should be eliminated.
