Honorable Senator,
I followed the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Judge Alito with great interest. After listening to Judge Alito's responses -- which were primarily non-responsive responses -- and after reading a number of his opinions and other writings, I urge you to vote NO on his nomination to the Supreme Court.
Judge Alito is An Extremist & an Idealogue
Judge Alito's positions on important issues facing this Country are deeply disturbing. For example, he:
*opposes a woman's right to choose her own future including whether or not she wants to terminate an unwanted pregnancy;
*vigorously opposes equal rights and civil rights for all Americans;
*has adopted disturbing ideas about affirmative action (including comparing it to slavery);
*has a caveman-like view that women are subservient and should remain "barefoot & pregnant"; and
*makes baseless assertions against America's fundamental principle of one-person, one-vote;
However, even more disturbing is his view that the Constitution supports some sort of omnipotent President such that the Office of the President is not only superior in authority to Congress and the Judiciary, but also superior to the people and the rule of law.
I believe this view to be completely contrary to the plain language of the Constitution. It is also abundantly clear from the historical documents produced by many of the same Founders (at about the same time as the Constitution was being written and discussed) mandating that no branch of government be superior to another such that it could possibly lead to the same tyranny from which they had escaped from under the British. That is why they included extensive provisions for a series of checks and balances between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the federal government.
The President is NOT Vested with any SUPER Powers
There is no support in the Constitution itself or any other authorizing document indicating that the President can grant himself some sort of omnipotent power. To the contrary, one of the most controversial topics debated during the Constitutional Convention was that many Founders were afraid to even create an Executive Branch for fear that such a Branch would do exactly what Bush, Cheney, and Gonzales are trying to do today -- create an Executive Branch that is superior to all other branches of government.
The Founders finally decided to create an Executive Branch, but, as is apparent from Article II, they wanted to Executive to have very clearly defined authority but severely restricted so as to minimize the chance that the Executive could not exercise any form of tyranny since the Congress and the Courts could bring any such assertion of power to a halt through their ability to check and balance the Executive Branch.
All Power is Vested in the People -- Not the Government -- Particularly NOT the President
Another corroborating factor that completely contradicts Bush's assertions that his authority under Article II trumps all other provisions in the Constitution is the underlying basis of the Constitution that the government was to serve the people, not the other way around. This was a profound and novel approach to government. The power rested with the people and the government could only do those things for which the people delegated authority to them.
History is clear that the Founders did not view the people as having to grant their power blindly to the government in exchange for certain rights and freedoms. America was a new country and was creating totally new and unique principles of government.
The Constitution grants to the Executive ONLY those powers explicitly stated Article II
There is absolutely no provision for the Executive Branch to be able to make decisions that effectively make the Legislative and Judicial branch moot. The black letter of the Constitution and the general history of the development and intent of that brillant document corroborate the fundamental principle of maintaining a balance of power between the Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary.
According to Marc H. Moriel, CEO and President of the National Urban League, ". . . not once, in 15 years, has Judge Alito written a majority opinion in favor of an African American alleging discrimination". Even his conservative allies in his own Circuit and those on the Supreme Court have written opinions noting that Alito was simply wrong in his rulings and opinions.
Expect & Accept Only the Best for the Supreme Court
Justices on the Supreme Court should be the most brilliant of all lawyers and judges. Although it is human nature to view matters through the lenses of one's own experience, judges, and particularly Justices, must be able to recognize and separate out their personal feelings about social, cultural, and political matters and focus on applying the law. That is the critical ability that should be possessed by all judges and justices.
The Trouble With Alito Being an Idealogue
Based on his writings and testimony, Judge Alito does not seem to be able, or perhaps willing, to separate out his personal social, cultural, and political ideas from the facts and law of the cases in front of him. Although this is a deeply disturbing trait in a federal Circuit Court judge, it can be balanced out in rulings by the other judges on the panel and, more importantly, his extremist opinions can be overruled by a higher court. If Alito is confirmed as a Justice, there is no higher court to which the American people may appeal his extremist views.
In his confirmation hearings, I heard Chief Justice Roberts unequivocably state that he was not an idealogue. I did not hear anything even similar to that from Judge Alito. I view "idealogues" as people who will determine an outcome based on their own views and then use whatever information they can to support that view. As a judge or justice, an idealogue would evaluate a case based on personal beliefs as opposed to the true facts and merits of the case. I am very concerned that Judge Alito is an idealogue. He has done nothing since his nomination that would indicate otherwise.
The U.S. Senate Must Protect the Constitution When The President Demonstrates he is Unable or Unwilling to do so
The Constitution vests in our great Senate the power, authority, and duty to assure that all federal judges will uphold the Constitution of the United States. Judge Alito's personal views are not just slightly right of mainstream, they are extremist. An idealogue with extremist positions has the potential to do great harm to the Country, the Constitution, and of course, "[we] the people."
There are hundreds of brilliant attorneys in this country that would make excellent Justices. They may be found on state or federal benches, in academia, big-city-big-law firms, and even in the offices of solo practitioners. There are likely even some excellent candidates that could be culled from the House or the Senate.
I urge you to settle for nothing less than the best legal mind and judicial temperment. Whether a candidate is liberal or uber-conservative would not matter if they were not idealogues but instead were simply knowlegeable and respectful of the law, the Courts, and the rights of the people to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Our Constitution was written by great minds and should be interpreted by Judges and Justices with minds just as great.
We should both expect and accept nothing less.
Rhonda Ross for Congress, MI-09
www.ross4congress.org