It has recently come to the media's attention that potential Supreme Court Justice Sam Alito once wrote on a job application (while at the Reagan administration) that he did not believe that the Constitution contained a right to an abortion. Now, in discussions with Senator Dianne Feinstein, Alito is claiming that he was merely applying for a job and that, regardless, his personal views won't be an issue when he is ruling from the bench. And DiFi was apparently appeased. Why?
The evidence available indicates that, gasp, Sam Alito may be a liar and surely is a right-wing shill.
First, when Alito was nominated to the Circuit Court of Appeals, he told the Senate Judiciary Committee that he would recuse himself from cases involving Vanguard, a company which held his mutual funds. Several years down the line, Alito not only ruled on a case involving Vanguard, but ruled against the plaintiff on every motion she made. So, here is an example of Alito saying one thing to the Senate Judiciary committee and then doing the opposite. In addition to inappropriately sitting in on the Vanguard case, Alito's personal interests in Vanguard may or may not have colored his rulings: how can we know for sure?
Second, Alito's claim that he didn't exactly mean what he said on the Reagan administration job application indicates that he is untrustworthy and willing to lie in order to secure job advancement. He may have lied then to Reagan, he lied to the Senate Judiciary committee in previous proceedings re: Vanguard, so what's to say he isn't lying now to Senator Feinstein and others?
Alito's exact language from the memo/job application: "I am particularly proud of my contributions in recent cases in which the government has argued in the Supreme Court that racial and ethnic quotas should not be allowed and that the Constitution does not protect a right to abortion."
And, to explain the memo, Alito said: "It was different then. I was an advocate seeking a job." So, you lie when you are seeking a job, huh.
Finally, Senator John Cornyn stated that Alito's personal views on abortion are irrelevant since he has promised to disregard them when ruling on the issue. This entirely misses the point: if Alito believes that the Constitution does not contain a right to an abortion, this will directly affect how he will rule on the issue regardless of whether he is personally in favor or opposed to legalized abortion.
In conclusion, the scant evidence available raises enough questions about Alito's extreme conservatism and honesty to justify a "no" vote on this nominee. I suggest the Senate Democrats use their current favor with the American public to block this nomination, via filibuster if necessary.