Good News! The Times Opposes Alito

Predictably, the Times is exposing themselves as being left of Dianne Feinstein in this editorial which blasts Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito as being out of the mainstream and an ideologue.

The catalyst of this, of course is the memo written by Alito in 1985 which I blogged about previously on his disagreement with abortion as a constitutional right. Alito put it in the context of an attorney seeking a job that involved advocacy. Feinstein seemed to accept the answer.

"He said first of all it was different then," Ms. Feinstein said. "He said, 'I was an advocate seeking a job, it was a political job and that was 1985. I'm now a judge, I've been on the circuit court for 15 years and it's very different. I'm not an advocate, I don't give heed to my personal views, what I do is interpret the law."'

She was asked if she found his answer satisfactory.

"The question is, Did I believe he was being absolutely truthful, and I did," she responded.

She said he "was very sincere, he was very direct in answering my questions, he clearly is well-steeped in the law, has a good mind, is an able thinker."

Evidently what is good enough for Feinstein (who probably won't vote to confirm him anyway, but refrains from branding him divisively) isn't good enough for the Old Gray Lady's editorial board.

That statement strongly suggests that Judge Alito is far outside the legal mainstream and that senators should question him closely about it.

_______________

First, he has extreme views on the law.

_______________

Second, Judge Alito does not respect precedent.

_______________

Third, he is an ideologue.

I would expect that the Times would cry in their beer and be intellectually dishonest about whomever Bush nominated. I didn't expect them to be so blatantly passionate about it.

I say again, this is good news.

Linked to The Political Teen.