Nomination Watch

How thoughtful: a thank-you note to the far right

It is being reported today that Justice Alito has written a thank-you note to James Dobson, founder and Chairman of Focus on the Family, to express his appreciation for all the "help and support" that Dobson and his organization provided during "the past few challenging months" -- i.e., during the debate over the confirmation of Justice Alito to the Supreme Court.  He continued, "As long as I serve on the Supreme Court I will keep in mind the trust that has been placed in me," and said he hopes to meet Dobson personally in the future.  You can read the full letter here.

Focus on the Family, in case you're not familiar with it, is a far-right organization that is virulently anti-choice, anti-gay rights, pro-prayer in the schools.  Dobson read the letter from Justice Alito in a radio broadcast, and crowed that the group's support for the Alito and Roberts nominations had "affected history" by helping put these justices on the court in time to hear a challenge to a federal abortion ban.   

We can only hope that in sending this letter, Justice Alito was merely trying to be courteous and did not mean to imply that on the Court he intends to serve the agenda of Focus on the Family or those like it who helped put him there.

supreme court

A watershed moment for women

This morning the Senate voted to confirm Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court by a vote of 58-42.   The vote was almost entirely along party lines, with only four Democrats voting in favor and one Republican (Chafee of Rhode Island) voting against.  NWLC Co-President Marcia Greenberger had this comment:

“Today, Samuel Alito was confirmed to the Supreme Court despite more Senate opposition than anyone except Clarence Thomas in the last century.  The strong ‘no’ vote reflects a deep and widely-held concern – in the Senate and across the country – that placing Judge Alito on the Supreme Court will put core American values and principles at risk.   This nomination was both dangerous and needlessly divisive.

“This is a watershed moment for women.  With the retirement of Sandra Day O’Connor, and the confirmation of Judge Alito, core legal rights for women are in serious jeopardy.  So much that we hold dear is now up for grabs – the right to choose, strong protections against sex discrimination, the power of Congress to protect the public in areas like family leave, and more. 

“Judicial philosophy does matter.  It matters whether a nominee will protect women’s rights, civil rights and Americans’ most fundamental rights and freedoms. In exercising their advice and consent, Senators have a responsibility to preserve a Court that will protect these core values.  We applaud the Senators who stood up for that principle and deeply regret that their view did not carry the day.”

To those readers of our blog who made your own voices heard in this important debate, we at nominationwatch.org extend our thanks – and hope you will keep up the fight for a fair and independent judiciary and strong legal rights for women.  We know we will!

supreme court samuel alito

Sad day for women's fundamental rights and freedoms

The Senate voted today to close debate on the Alito nomination, clearing the way for a final vote on the nomination tomorrow morning.  Here is the statement issued by National Women's Law Center Co-President Marcia Greenberger:

“This is a sad day that augers ill for women’s most fundamental rights and freedoms.  The Senate’s decision to end debate on this nomination means that Samuel Alito will replace Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court.  The country will be living with the consequences of this decision for generations to come.

“We know from Judge Alito’s writings during his government service and his rulings in 15 years on the federal bench that his approach to the law is a far cry from that of Sandra Day O’Connor.  Core legal protections for women will be at grave risk as a result of his confirmation. The right to choose, as protected by Roe v. Wade, is virtually certain to be eviscerated. Protections against sex discrimination are in danger.  And Congress’s power to protect the public welfare and effectively address issues like family leave will be jeopardized as well.

“We commend those senators who took a principled stand for women’s rights, civil rights and the hard won rights of every American by voting today against allowing this nomination to go forward.  We are profoundly disappointed that there were not enough votes to block his confirmation.  The Senate has now paved the way for final approval tomorrow.”

supreme court samuel alito

This is it!! Crucial Alito votes scheduled for next week

Two votes are now scheduled that will determine the fate of the Alito nomination.  Late yesterday, in the face of calls for a filibuster by some of the Senate’s most stalwart opponents of the nomination, Senate Majority Leader Frist filed a motion to shut off Senate debate on the nomination.  The vote on Frist’s motion – called a cloture motion – will take place at 4:30 pm on Monday, Jan. 30.  For the nomination to move forward, Alito’s supporters have to have 60 votes to end debate.  We are strongly urging Senators to vote No on cloture to ensure that Samuel Alito will not sit on the Supreme Court! 

If there are at least 60 votes for cloture on Monday afternoon, there will be a final vote on the nomination on Tuesday morning at 11 am.  If a majority of the Senators vote “aye”, the battle will be over and Alito will be confirmed.

If, like us, you do not believe Samuel Alito belongs on the Supreme Court, now is the time to call your Senators and urge them to vote “no on cloture” on Monday, and (if necessary) “no on the nomination” on Tuesday.  You can call the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask for your Senator’s office.  If you’re having trouble getting through, click here for step-by-step instructions for calling your Senators directly.  Do it now!

supreme court samuel alito

Women senators joining in strong opposition to Alito nomination

This week, the full Senate has begun debate on the Alito nomination and we are pleased to see that the number of No votes is growing as senators evaluate the record of Judge Alito and determine that he should not become Justice Alito. Women senators have made powerful statements announcing their opposition. Senators Hillary Clinton , Barbara Boxer, Debbie Stabenow, Patty Murray, Barbara Mikulski, Dianne Feinstein, and Blanche Lincoln have all declared that they will be voting No on Alito.  Here are highlights from some of their statements:

Senator Mikulski: “Based on his own statements and his testimony at the hearings, I am left with very serious doubts about whether he will safeguard civil rights, the right to privacy and equal protection of the law for all Americans….He seems to be willing to take strong and clear positions in his court opinions, job applications and speeches, but unwilling to be clear about those very same positions when asked about them at his hearing. We are left to wonder if he will protect fundamental rights, like the right of privacy, the right to equal opportunities and the right to be free from unnecessary government intrusion….A Justice of the Supreme Court must be able to see through the abstractions and understand the role of the law in the lives of all Americans, not just the powerful and influential.”

Senator Feinstein:  “If one is pro-choice in this day and age, with the balance of the Court in question, one can’t vote for Judge Alito. It is that simple. I’m very concerned about the impact he would have on women’s rights, including a woman’s right to make certain reproductive choices, as limited by state regulations in many cases….And I came to the conclusion that the fundamental right to liberty is at issue with this nominee. It has nothing to do with his qualifications and his credentials. But it does have something to do with how far we are willing to see this Court move to the right and out of the mainstream of legal thinking in this great country. And I, for one, really believe that there comes a time when you just have to stand up, particularly when you know that the majority of people think as you do….[I]t is a vote that is made with the belief that legal thinking and personal views, especially at times of crisis, at times of conflict, and at times of controversy do mean something. And those of us that don’t agree with the view have to stand up and vote no. And so I am one of those.”

Senator Clinton: “I have concluded I cannot give my consent to his nomination to the Supreme Court. The way I read American history is that the key to American progress has been the ever-expanding circle of freedom and opportunity….We all know the famous cases cited as representing this forward march of progress: Brown v. Board of Education, which struck down the notion of separate but equal; Baker v. Carr, which invalidated discriminatory State voting apportionment schemes and paved the way for the concept of one man, one vote; Griswold v. Connecticut, which recognized a right to privacy in the Constitution; Roe v. Wade, which established that women have a right to choose. We need judges who will maintain that forward progress. Despite his distinguished academic credentials, Judge Alito has not shown himself to be that kind of judge.…Time and again, when given the choice, he has voted to narrow the circle, to restrict the rights Americans hold dear.”

Senator Boxer: “[A]fter reviewing the hearing record and the record of his statements, writings and rulings over the past 24 years, I am convinced that Judge Alito is the wrong person for this job….Will Justice Alito vote to protect the right to privacy, especially a woman’s reproductive freedom? Judge Alito’s record says NO….To my mind, Judge Alito’s ominous statements and narrow minded reasoning clearly signal a hostility to women’s rights, and portend a move back toward the dark days when abortion was illegal in many states, and many women died as a result. In the 21st century, it is astounding that a Supreme Court nominee would not view Roe v. Wade as settled law when its fundamental principle – a woman’s right to choose - has been reaffirmed many times since it was decided.”

Senator Murray:  “The next justice will have the power to change the Court, change the country, and change our rights for generations. Judge Alito has a very troubling record. In his hearing and in our private meeting, he did not show he will be an independent judge who will uphold the rights and liberties of all Americans. With our rights and freedoms on the line, I will not take a chance on Judge Alito because I have serious questions about his independence and commitment to protecting our rights and liberties.”

Senator Lincoln: “I can not in good conscience support his nomination to the Supreme Court to replace Sandra Day O’Connor….Of equal concern is Judge Alito’s record on the issue of discrimination in the workplace. In Chittister v. Department of Community and Economic Development, Judge Alito’s statement that the Family Medical Leave Act was a "disproportionate solution" to the problem of workplace discrimination is deeply troubling….I fear that Judge Alito’s inability to recognize this type of discrimination threatens dire consequences for rights hard won by women over the last few decades. The majority of our nation’s families depend on income from both parents just to get by. The future and strength of our nation depends on the strength of the fabric that our families are made of. I can not in good conscience vote to allow any of the gains that have allowed women to become an integral part of our nation’s workforce while remaining exceptional mothers to their children to be rolled back.”

The floor debate is still going on and we would like to see all of their female Senate colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, join the opposition led by these women.

supreme court samuel alito

Editorial opposition to Alito nomination is mounting

As Senate debate begins, we hope Senators are mindful of the editorials across the country, in large papers and small, urging No votes.   Here is a small sampling:

“JUDGE ALITO’S RADICAL VIEWS” – THE NEW YORK TIMES, 1/23:  “Judge Alito has consistently shown a bias in favor of those in power over those who need the law to protect them. Women, racial minorities, the elderly and workers who come to court seeking justice should expect little sympathy. In the same flat bureaucratic tones he used at the hearings, he is likely to insist that the law can do nothing for them”.

“WORD FOR WORD: WHO WON, AND WHO LOST, THE FIGHT OVER ALITO? LITTLE GUYS ARE THE LOSERS” – THE CHARLESTON GAZETTE, 1/22: “Most disturbing is Alito's record of consistently siding, in case after case, with big corporations and established power against the little guy. . . .  [In one mining case,] Alito's instinct was to rule in favor of the company and against injured miners on a flawed, pedantic - and wrong - interpretation of the law."

“ALITO WRONG FOR SUPREME COURT” – GRAND FORKS HERALD, NORTH DAKOTA, 1/16:  “Alito reads the Constitution and finds more power for the government and fewer rights for individuals.  This apparent indifference to individual rights is disturbing. It runs counter to American history, which proves that human rights are won through political and legal struggle.”

“REJECT JUDGE ALITO” – FLORIDA TODAY – 1/24:  “We're convinced Alito will do everything in his power to end a woman's right to make private medical decisions about abortion by helping overturn Roe v. Wade, if he's confirmed.  He stated in 1985 that he believes there is no constitutional right to an abortion, despite the Supreme Court decision the 14th amendment's right to privacy confers one. And he refused during this month's hearings to admit to any less-extreme position.”

“ALITO: EVASIONS AND RESERVATIONS” – ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, MISSOURI, 1/15: “[I]n 15 years as a judge on the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Mr. Alito compiled a record that is far more conservative than the mild-mannered opinions he expressed in four days in the witness chair. If confirmed, he is likely to join with Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, and possibly Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., to form a solid conservative bloc on the court for years to come.”

“ALITO A BAD CHOICE” – WINSTON-SALEM JOURNAL, NORTH CAROLINA, 1/18:  “In Alito, the court will not be getting the kind of moderately conservative justice it had in O'Connor. She sat along the middle of the court's spectrum and swayed debate and resolutions toward the center….  Alito will not be in the center, and he is not a mainstream conservative.”

For a more complete list of newspapers that either have come out in full opposition or have been critical of Alito’s nomination, check out IndependentCourt.org’s list.

supreme court samuel alito

Why were they cheering?

The media is reporting today that in the annual anti-Roe v. Wade march in Washington that took place yesterday, activists cheered whenever Alito’s name was mentioned.  Some at the march said things like, "We must support the confirmation of Judge Alito and other jurists who will . . . make it possible once and for all to end Roe v. Wade” and gleefully proclaimed, "This might be our last march! Our next march very well may be the March to Celebrate the Overturning of Roe v. Wade!"  In reaction that last statement, according to the Washington Post, “the crowd went nuts.”

The anti-Roe activists are clearly confident that putting Alito on the Court means the beginning of the end of Roe v. Wade and the right to choose.  Apparently they don’t put much credence in Judge Alito’s assurances of “an open mind.”  Nor do we.   

supreme court samuel alito

NWLC reaction to today’s Committee vote

The Senate Judiciary Committee just approved the Alito nomination in a 10-8 party-line vote.  Senators Leahy, Kennedy, Biden, Kohl, Feinstein, Feingold, Schumer and Durbin all voted No.

NWLC Co-President Marcia Greenberger issued this statement: 

“The large number of senators who voted no understand that Samuel Alito would likely eviscerate core legal rights for women and shift the Court in a dangerous direction.  His confirmation would jeopardize a women’s right to choose, undermine Congress’s power to protect the public welfare in areas like family leave, and make it harder for victims of sexual harassment and other forms of discrimination to have a fair shake in court.

“Alito’s nomination now moves to the full Senate where it must be rejected. This vote is not about party labels. Senators who care about women’s rights – and certainly about a right to choose – should look at how Judge Alito’s confirmation would affect people’s lives and they should vote no. The risks are simply too great to confirm Judge Alito. The Senate’s decision on Samuel Alito will have profound consequences for women for the next two generations and possibly more.”

supreme court samuel alito

Judiciary Committee to vote on Alito nomination tomorrow

The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to meet tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. to debate the Alito nomination and vote on it.  You can watch the vote live on C-SPAN beginning at 9:30 a.m.  Assuming the Committee approves the nomination – which appears likely, since even a straight party-line vote would mean committee approval of the nomination by a vote of 10 to 8, and no Republicans appear inclined to vote No -- the nomination will then be sent to the full Senate for consideration.  Debate in the Senate is likely to start on Wednesday. We hope that the Senate floor debate is not rushed and allows the time and consideration that is due for such an important – and irrevocable – decision.   

supreme court samuel alito

NWLC’s post-hearing analysis: Alito's testimony reinforces his unsuitability for the Court

After a careful review of the transcripts of Judge Alito’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the National Women's Law Center has released its post-hearing analysis. The Center found that “Judge Alito’s testimony during three days of testimony did nothing to allay the concerns raised by his extensive record; on the contrary, his testimony only underscores the conclusion that he is an unsuitable replacement for Sandra Day O’Connor.”   The Center notes that in his testimony, Alito confirmed that the dangerous views he expressed earlier in his career – notably, that the Constitution does not protect the right to choose – were indeed his views at that time, and he steadfastly refused to express a different view now or to say that he now accepts Roe v. Wade as settled law.  It finds that his testimony concerning his membership in Concerned Alumni of Princeton and his ignorance of its controversial activities is not plausible.  It also explains how Judge Alito mischaracterized his most extreme positions on the Third Circuit, and shows why his attempts to defend his harsh positions in cases alleging sexual harassment and other forms of employment discrimination do not withstand scrutiny.  NWLC is even more convinced, after this review of the testimony, that the confirmation of Samuel Alito would put core legal rights for women at grave risk.

supreme court samuel alito