Preserve the Balance
Team Supreme Blog
Questions, Yes; Answers, Not So Much
Just when it seemed like Judge Alito would slip by without being asked about GLBT issues, my home state Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) jumped into the fray.
Of course, the fact that Alito was asked the questions does not mean that he gave informative or satisfactory answers. We thought Justice John Roberts was good at dodging committee questions, but while not as smooth as Roberts, Alito was at least as good at obfuscation. I doubt anyone who examines the transcript of all three days of committee questions can find more than a handful of questions in which Alito expressed his personal or legal opinion.
Senator Feingold first asked whether Congress has the power to enact laws like the proposed Employment Non-Discrimination Act to protect GLBT Americans. Alito’s answer was one of the more concrete he’s given all week, although he left himself plenty of wiggle room: “I can't think of a reason why Congress would not have that power, but I would have to be presented with the arguments.”
Feingold also asked Alito about the Saxe case, in which Alito struck down a school district’s harassment policy, and for which he received the Family Research Council’s “Golden Gavel” award. Feingold stated that Family Research Council is an anti-gay group. It was refreshing to see a United States Senator call it like he sees it—there can be little doubt that FRC does not protect families, as it claims, but spreads hate toward the GLBT community.
If only Alito had been as candid. He mischaracterized the harassment policy at issue. He described it as prohibiting nearly any speech, when in fact it only addressed severe, pervasive harassment that created a hostile environment or interfered with a student’s education.
Finally, Feingold asked whether Congress could put conditions on use of federal funds that require a school district to adopt an anti-harassment policy. Alito’s answer seems to indicate it would be okay, but he was not at all definitive.
These were exactly the right questions. It’s just too bad that Alito wouldn’t provide any real answers.
Now that the questioning is over, the questions remain. Judge Alito says assess him based on his record as a judge over the last 15 years. It’s that very record that raises serious questions for GLBT Americans.
Judge Alito could have used his testimony to demonstrate that he was a fair-minded judge who understands the impact of the law on everyday Americans. He didn’t. He could have used his testimony to commit to supporting the extensive jurisprudence supporting the right to privacy. He didn’t. None of our pre-hearing doubts have been assuaged.
How disappointing. And scary.
Of course, the fact that Alito was asked the questions does not mean that he gave informative or satisfactory answers. We thought Justice John Roberts was good at dodging committee questions, but while not as smooth as Roberts, Alito was at least as good at obfuscation. I doubt anyone who examines the transcript of all three days of committee questions can find more than a handful of questions in which Alito expressed his personal or legal opinion.
Senator Feingold first asked whether Congress has the power to enact laws like the proposed Employment Non-Discrimination Act to protect GLBT Americans. Alito’s answer was one of the more concrete he’s given all week, although he left himself plenty of wiggle room: “I can't think of a reason why Congress would not have that power, but I would have to be presented with the arguments.”
Feingold also asked Alito about the Saxe case, in which Alito struck down a school district’s harassment policy, and for which he received the Family Research Council’s “Golden Gavel” award. Feingold stated that Family Research Council is an anti-gay group. It was refreshing to see a United States Senator call it like he sees it—there can be little doubt that FRC does not protect families, as it claims, but spreads hate toward the GLBT community.
If only Alito had been as candid. He mischaracterized the harassment policy at issue. He described it as prohibiting nearly any speech, when in fact it only addressed severe, pervasive harassment that created a hostile environment or interfered with a student’s education.
Finally, Feingold asked whether Congress could put conditions on use of federal funds that require a school district to adopt an anti-harassment policy. Alito’s answer seems to indicate it would be okay, but he was not at all definitive.
These were exactly the right questions. It’s just too bad that Alito wouldn’t provide any real answers.
Now that the questioning is over, the questions remain. Judge Alito says assess him based on his record as a judge over the last 15 years. It’s that very record that raises serious questions for GLBT Americans.
Judge Alito could have used his testimony to demonstrate that he was a fair-minded judge who understands the impact of the law on everyday Americans. He didn’t. He could have used his testimony to commit to supporting the extensive jurisprudence supporting the right to privacy. He didn’t. None of our pre-hearing doubts have been assuaged.
How disappointing. And scary.
Comments
On Alito: Dianne Feinstein talks the talk but her ultimate actions may prove her to be a spineless traitor to core Democratic values and to mainstream America. Fearful of a radical right-wing extremist "backlash" (wake-up Dianne...we're already LIVING in the right-wing backlash!) she has implied that she will not support a filibuster of Judge Alito despite her belief and statement: "If you asked me who would Alito most be like, it would probably be, I'd have to say, Scalia." SCALIA?!? ANOTHER SCALIA IS THE WORST-CASE SCENARIO! AND SHE'S RAISING THE WHITE FLAG??? It would mean GAME OVER for mainstream America but Dianne is ready to not only give up this fight, BUT PUBLICLY BROADCAST THIS WEAKNESS SO THAT OTHER DEMOCRATIC SENATORS MAY FOLLOW SUIT?!? THIS IS NOT ABOUT QUALIFICATIONS! THIS IS ABOUT THE FUTURE NATURE OF OUR VERY COUNTRY! THIS IS ABOUT THE SUSTAINABILITY OF AMERICA AS AMERICA! She's going to fear a radical backlash and allow the completion of the theocratic/corporate usurpation of all levels of government power by the radical right-wing extremists??? Would Republicans ever tolerate this situation if the shoes were on the other feet? YOU CAN BET NOT, AND NOT EVER! IF NOT DIANNE, WHO IS GOING TO FIGHT FOR MAINSTREAM AMERICA?!!!?!?!? SHAME ON DIANNE FEINSTEIN and all other so-called "Democrat" senators who have buckled under the pressure and are going to abandon their values! SHAME on them for falling right into the carefully orchestrated Republican trap of making them fear some ridiculous "backlash" from the fundamentalist loud-mouths who will readily trash the constitution for a Bible-based Taliban-style society when they get their way. SHAME on them for even considering for one moment that they would NOT FIGHT ANOTHER SCALIA on this ever-so-carefully-balance Supreme Court. America in 10 years with another Scalia on the court will be a very very very different America. It will be a frightening America. DIANNE: SHAME SHAME SHAME SHAME SHAME!! CONTACT DIANNE'S OFFICE VIA EMAIL AT http://feinstein.senate.gov/email.html. Contact your other weak-kneed so-called Democrat senators and DEMAND that they filibuster this wretched right-wing Republican robot who has proven himself ready and anxious to trash individual liberties and rights and lavish yet more windfalls on corporations, Republican controlled local and state governments and the radical religious right extremists. TELL DIANNE AND THE OTHER SENATORS: This IS the EXACT SCENARIO with which to use a filibuster...To STOP ANOTHER SCALIA...because "another Scalia" on the court is GAME OVER for America. If you value America, don't just sit there and read this. DO SOMETHING! TAKE ACTION! EVERY INDIVIDUAL CAN HELP! Write Dianne. Call her office. Call your other Democratic senators and DEMAND A FILIBUSTER!
posted by | 1/16/2006 1:54 PM | Permalink
.