Senator: Hatch
SPECTER: Senator Hatch?
HATCH: Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I strongly support this outstanding nominee. Under an reasonable, objective or traditional standard, the Senate would overwhelmingly confirm this exceptional nominee.
Only about a dozen years or so ago, the Senate applied such a standard and overwhelmingly confirmed two nominees of President Clinton. They were at least as liberal as Judge Alito is said to be conservative.
One of them, Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and, of course, Judge Stephen Breyer -- we all knew that they were both social liberals. We knew that and yet we voted for them because they were qualified and they were put forward by a constitutionally elected president of the United States who had the right to do so.
Yet the Senate confirmed Justice Ginsburg by a vote of 96-3 and Justice Breyer by a vote of 87-9. These two Clinton nominees received only a dozen negative votes between them.
Observer of what the judicial confirmation process has become in the last several years might have a hard time remembering that particular fair process.
HATCH: Where were the filibusters? Where were the litmus paper and the score cards? Did the people tally up Justice Ginsburg's past appeals court rulings and on that basis warn that she would not give certain groups a fair shake in the future?
No, the Senate overwhelmingly confirmed Justices Ginsburg and Breyer because we acknowledged their obvious qualifications and judicial temperament. And we gave the president, the then-president, the deference required by the separation of powers.
By that traditional standard, Judge Alito should receive at least as much support as they did.
Judge Alito is exceptionably well qualified, with over 15 years on the U.S. Court of Appeals, during which time he has participated in nearly 5,000 cases, written more than 360 opinions.
After interviewing hundreds of people and reviewing hundreds of opinions and other writings, and examining charges raised by critics, the American Bar Association unanimously, once again, gave Judge Alito its highest, well-qualified rating.
The ABA's criteria include a nominee's compassion, open- mindedness, freedom from bias, and commitment to equal justice under the law.
Liberal legal scholars and even liberal editorial pages have said that while they do not agree with everything Judge Alito has written or concluded, his opinions are thoughtful, well reasoned, careful and respectful of precedent.
Judge Alito's colleagues came before this committee to give the kind of insight and perspective that no one but those working most closely with the judge can give. Seven current and former members of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit gave remarkable testimony about Judge Alito's intellect, open-mindedness, character and judicial independence.
HATCH: Judge Leonard Garth, for whom Judge Alito clerked and with whom he now serves, said that Judge Alito has ever expressed anything that can be described as an agenda.
Judge Timothy Lewis, describing himself as openly and unapologetically pro-choice and a civil rights activist, said that Judge Alito, whether in the courtroom or behind closed doors, never exhibited anything resembling an ideological bent.
All of the evidence -- every bit of it points to a judge who honors his oaths to be impartial and to render justice without respect to persons.
Under the standards that we used not that long ago, this would have been more than enough to confirm Judge Alito in short order.
That was then. As the vote we will soon take will show, times have changed.
I believe, Mr. Chairman, that the key to this nominee's opposition is, indeed, to be found in his testimony before this committee.
Judge Alito, after all, testified that the judiciary has an important but limited role. His opponents must believe that the judiciary should have an all-important and unlimited role.
It seems that some on the left cannot abide a judge who thinks that the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, governs not only the legislative and executive branch, but also the judicial branch as well.
Judge Alito said that judges do not have authority to change the Constitution. While constitutional principles must be applied to new factual situations, he said, quote, "the principles don't change," unquote.
That alone, in the eyes of the critics, must be the confirmation kiss of death. How, after all, will they achieve a political agenda that the people reject if the Constitution is not whatever the judges say it is?
In deciding cases, Judge Alito said he begins and often ends with the text of the statute, that statutes are presumptively constitutional and that there is a presumption that precedents will be followed.
There he goes again, outlining an important but limited role for judges.
HATCH: And I can see why some of his critics are so worked up. A judge like this is bound to make us legislators act like, well, legislators.
Judge Alito's testimony before this committee was absolutely consistent with the system of limited government and separated powers established by America's founders.
His testimony was just as inconsistent with the system of judicial activism that some political interests favor so that they can achieve their agenda through the courts rather than through the elected representatives.
That is what this debate is about. The reason why so many senators and the political interests to which they cater will not support Judge Alito is that they cannot support the kind of limited judiciary that he represents.
A limited judiciary will not get them where they want to go. A limited judiciary leaves too many issues, too many questions, too many decisions to the people and to the people's elected representatives.
The debate over judicial appointments in general and over this nomination in particular is about whether the American people and those they elect still have the power to make the law and define the culture, or whether judges, unelected judges, should do it for us instead.
Like America's founders, Judge Alito clearly believes in self- government, that the people not judges, should make the law, and that judges have an important role, but must know and stay in their proper place.
That is why his critics oppose him, and that is why he must be confirmed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SPECTER: Thank you, Senator Hatch.
Contents
Prev
Next
Last
