I don't mean this to be a misleading message. I am not trying to make social conservatives turn against Alito because he once supported basic rights for gay Americans, nor am I deluding myself into thinking that he is going to be a big hero for gays or for privacy if/when he gets on the Court. I would settle for a moderately conservative vote, a la O'Connor. Based on his
rulings, his opinions on gay rights are mixed at best. As for privacy rights, many would argue that his vote in favor of upholding 1991's Casey law or the controversial
strip search But there seems to be more to the story than these rulings.
When he was a senior at Princeton, Alito was not exactly following the Young Republican line. Take a look:
Samuel A. Alito Jr. chaired an undergraduate task force that recommended the decriminalization of sodomy, accused the CIA and the FBI of invading the privacy of citizens, and said discrimination against gays in hiring ''should be forbidden."
Jeffrey Weil, not Alito, wrote the sections regarding gay rights, but can you imagine Scalia ever being a part of such a document? Here's more:
The report covered what its undergraduate authors saw as increasing threats to privacy in the late 1960s, questioning whether the ''cybernetic revolution" would result in more invasions of privacy and criticizing government surveillance of ''mild dissenters on the war in Vietnam."
This part is personally written by Alito:
''The erosion of privacy, unlike war, economic bad times, or domestic unrest, does not jump to the citizen's attention . . . But by the time privacy is seriously compromised, it is too late to clamor for reform."
Obviously, people can change over 35 years. People can sell out their principles for power. Few crusaders for civil rights went on to work in the Reagan administration. I'm not trying to claim that this is some big sign that Alito must be confirmed. I just think it adds more shadings not only to Alito but also to the judicial nominations made by the current President. I do have to wonder why it is that all three of President Bush's SCOTUS nominations have had mixed track records on gay rights (and no, I don't think it's because they're all gay).
If nothing else, this tells us that he could be a far more complicated man than the RNC's press releases indicate, and we need to see not only how he responds to questions, but also how the far right will deal with the mere possibility of one of their judicial icons being more tolerant and reasoned than many of those who champion him.