Date: January, 9 2006
Senator: Leahy
Topic:
Contents
LEAHY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, Judge and Mrs. Alito and the others.
You know, following up on what the chairman was saying, the challenge for Judge Alito in the course of these hearings is to demonstrate that he's going to protect the rights and liberties of all Americans and, in doing that, serve as an effective check on government overreaching.
I have said that the president did not help his cause by withdrawing his earlier nomination of Harriet Miers in the face of criticism from the narrow faction of his own party who were concerned about how she might vote.
Supreme Court nominations should not be conducted through a series of winks and nods designed to reassure a small faction of our population, while leaving the American people in the dark.
I think we'd all agree, no president should be allowed to pack the courts, especially the Supreme Court, with nominees selected to enshrine presidential claims of government power.
LEAHY: The checks and balances that should be provided by the courts, Congress and the Constitution are too important to be sacrificed to a narrow, partisan agenda.
So this hearing is the opportunity for the American people to learn what Samuel Alito thinks about their fundamental constitutional rights and whether he -- you, Judge -- will protect their liberty, their privacy and their autonomy from government intrusion.
The Supreme Court belongs to all Americans, not just to the person occupying the White House and not just to a narrow faction of either political party.
The Supreme Court is our ultimate check and balance. Independence of the court and its members is crucial to our democracy and our way of life.
And the Senate should never be allowed to be a rubber stamp. Neither should the Supreme Court. So I will ask the judge to demonstrate his independence from the interest of the president appointing him or nominating him.
This is a nomination to a lifetime seat on the nation's highest court. It's going to a seat that's often represented the decisive vote on constitutional issues, so we have to make an informed decision. That means knowing more about Samuel Alito's work in the government and knowing more about his views.
I will, as the judge knows, ask about the disturbing memorandum he wrote to become a political appointee in the Meese Justice Department. In that, he professed concern with the fundamental principle of one person, one vote, a principle of the equality that's the bedrock of our laws.
LEAHY: And this hearing is the only opportunity that the American people and their representatives have to consider the suitability of the nominee to serve as a final arbiter on the meaning of the Constitution and its laws.
Has he demonstrated commitment to the fundamental rights of all Americans? Will he allow the government to intrude on Americans' personal privacy and freedoms?
In a time when this administration seems intent on accumulating unchecked power, Judge Alito's views on executive power are especially important. It's important to know whether he would serve with judicial independence or as a surrogate for the president nominating him.
And so this public conversation, this hearing over the next few days, is extremely important. It's the people's Constitution and the people's rights that we're all charged with protecting and preserving.
In this hearing, we embark on the constitutional process, one that was designed to protect these rights and has served this country for so very well for more than two centuries.
I'm reminded of a photograph, Mr. Chairman, that hangs in the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. Shows the first woman ever to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States taking the oath of office in 1981. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor serves as a model Supreme Court justice, widely recognized as a jurist with practical values, a sense of the consequences of the legal decisions being made by the Supreme Court.
And I regret that some on the extreme right have been so critical of Justice O'Connor and have adamantly opposed the naming of a successor who shares her judicial philosophy and qualities. And their criticism actually reflects poorly upon them. It does nothing to tarnish the record of the first woman to serve an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.
She's a justice whose graciousness and sense of duty fuels her continued service, even agreeing to serve more than six months after her retirement date. And I know both you and I commend her for that.
The court that serves America should reflect America. This nomination was an opportunity, of course, for the president to make a nomination based on diversity. He didn't, even though there's no dearth of highly qualified Hispanics and African-Americans, other individuals who could well have served as unifying nominees while adding to diversity.
Actually I look -- but that, of course, is the president's choice, Judge, not yours. But I look forward to the time when the membership of the Supreme Court's more reflective of the country it serves.
LEAHY: Now, as the Senate begins its consideration of President Bush's nominee, his third to this seat, to Justice O'Connor's seat, we do so mindful of her critical role on the Supreme Court. Her legacy is one of fairness. And when I decide how to vote it's because I want to see that legacy preserved.
Justice O'Connor has been a guardian of the protections the Constitution provides the American people. She's come to provide balance and a check on government intrusion into our personal privacy and freedoms.
In the Hamdi decision, she rejected the Bush administration's claim that it could indefinitely detain a United States citizen. She upheld the fundamental principle of judicial review over the exercise of government power.
And she wrote -- and this is one we should all remember -- she wrote that even war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens. She held that even this president is not above the law. And of course no president, Democratic or Republican -- no president -- is above the law, as neither are you, nor I, nor anyone in this room.
Her judgment has also been critical in protecting our environmental rights. She joined in 5-4 majorities affirming reproductive freedom and religious freedom and the Voting Rights Act.
Each of these cases -- and I mention them because they make how important a single Supreme Court justice is -- and it's crucial that we determine what kind of justice Samuel Alito would be if confirmed. And of course, Judge, my question will be: Will you be an independent jurist?
It is as the elected representatives of the American people, all the people, nearly 300 million people, that we in the Senate are charged with the responsibility to examine whether to entrust their precious rights and liberties to this nominee.
LEAHY: The Constitution is their document. It guarantees their rights from the heavy hand of government intrusion and the individual liberties to freedom of speech, to religion, to equal treatment, to due process and to privacy. Actually, this hearing, this is their process.
The federal judiciary is unlike the other branches of government. And once confirmed, a federal judge serves for life. And there's no court above the Supreme Court. So the American people deserve a Supreme Court justice who can demonstrate that he or she will not be beholden to the president, but only to the law.
Last October, the president succumbed to partisan pressure from the extreme right of his party by withdrawing Harriet Miers. And by withdrawing her nomination and substituting this one, the president has allowed his choice to be vetoed by an extreme faction within his party before even a hearing or a vote.
Frankly, that was an eye-opening experience to me. It gives the impression that there are those who do not want an independent federal judiciary. They demand judges who will guarantee the results that they want.
And that's why the questions will be asked so specifically of you, Judge.
The nomination is being considered against the backdrop of another revelation: that the president has, outside the law, been conducting secret and warrant-less spying on Americans for more than four years.
This is a time when the protections of Americans' liberties are directly at risk, as are the checks and balances that have served to constrain abuses of power for more than 200 years. The Supreme Court is relied upon by all of to us protect our fundamental rights.
Now, I have not decided how I will vote in this nomination and, like the chairman, I will base my determination on the whole record at the conclusion of these hearings, just as I did in connection with the nomination of John Roberts to be chief justice.
LEAHY: At the conclusion of those hearings, I determined to vote for him.
Stakes for the American people could not be higher. At this critical moment, Senate Democrats serving on this committee will perform our constitutional advice and consent responsibility with heightened vigilance.
But I would urge all senators -- Republicans, Democrats, independents -- to join us with in serious consideration.
The appointment of the next Supreme Court justice must be made in the people's interest and in the nation's interest, not in the interest of any partisan faction.
Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
SPECTER; Thank you very much, Senator Leahy.
Senator Hatch?
Contents
Prev
Next
Last
