Newhouse News Service

WASHINGTON – In what Republicans described as a desperate “Hail Mary” pass and a “smear campaign,” Democrats on Wednesday attacked Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito for his membership during the 1980s in a conservative Princeton alumni group that opposed increasing minority and female enrollment at the university.

In the third day of his confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Alito faced more questions about abortion, executive power and his 15 years as a federal appeals court judge, but it was his membership in Concerned Alumni of Princeton that generated the most heat.

Alito has endured long days of hearings with unshakable calm, but the grueling interrogation took its toll on his wife, Martha, who left the room teary-eyed Wednesday when a sympathetic Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., offered Alito a chance to defend himself, asking rhetorically if he is “a closet bigot.”

“I’m not any kind of a bigot, I’m not,” Alito responded.

Graham apologized for the tenor of the committee’s questioning: “I am sorry you had to go through this. I am sorry that your family has had to sit and listen to this.”

After a break, Alito’s wife returned with him and resumed her vigil from a seat directly behind him. Alito and his wife left the hearing together Wednesday night, smiling, walking hand-in-hand.

Alito was slated to return this morning for final questions before outside witnesses get their opportunity to testify about his worthiness for a seat on the high court. A vote of the 10 Republicans and eight Democrats on the panel could come next week.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., initially urged the committee to issue a subpoena for documents that might shed light on any role Alito played with the controversial alumni group. Contacted later by Republican staffers, CAP founder and National Review editor William Rusher agreed to release the papers now housed in the Library of Congress.

In a statement issued Wednesday, Rusher said Alito had “next to no involvement” with the group.

Kennedy and other Democrats expressed skepticism over Alito’s explanation that he does not recall participating in the group, which he listed on a 1985 Justice Department application for a political appointment. Kennedy also read from a 1983 article in the group’s publication attacking blacks, Hispanics, gays and women.

“I have to say that … his explanations about the membership in this sort of radical group, and why you listed it on your job application, are extremely troubling. And, in fact, I don’t think that they add up,” Kennedy said.

Alito said he was never active in the group, can’t really remember belonging to it even though he listed it on his application, and had no idea of the group’s views. “Had I thought that that’s what this organization stood for, I would never associate myself with it in any way,” said Alito.

“If I had participated in the group in any active way, if I had attended meetings or done anything else substantial in connection with this group, I would remember it,” he said.

Republicans, sensing growing momentum behind the Alito nomination, accused Kennedy and his Democratic colleagues of focusing on his membership in CAP and trying to unfairly associate him with its positions because they have been unable to gain any traction on other issues.

“It’s kind of like we’re in the fourth quarter of a football game and you’re the quarterback and your team is way ahead … and you’re going to keep getting these last-minute Hail Marys thrown at you,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

“This is another transparent attempt by the Democrats to wage an unfair smear campaign against an exceptionally qualified nominee,” said Sen. Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said he gets the “sense that there is a growing air of inevitability about the confirmation of this nominee.”

Alito’s nomination is troubling to Democrats because he would replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, a moderate voice on the court who has been a key vote on issues like abortion and affirmative action. But Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., said Alito need not strive to be the court’s new O’Connor.

“If I’m confirmed, I’ll be myself. I’ll be the same person that I was on the court of appeals. That’s the only thing that I can say in answer to that,” Alito said.

Alito said he aspires to the high court not to pursue an agenda, but to serve the law.

Ideologue

Wednesday’s questions from the senators and Alito’s answers plowed little new ground, with Democrats continuing to portray the nominee as a conservative ideologue and Alito calmly vowing to respect the court’s precedents and to be an open-minded and fair justice.

Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., brought up Alito’s 1985 Justice Department memo in which he said he supported the Reagan administration’s opposition to the 1973 decision in the case of Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion.

“I’m sorry to report that your memo seeking a job in the Reagan administration does not evidence an open mind. It evidences a mind that sadly is closed in some areas,” Durbin said.

While he took that position in 1985, Alito said as a justice he would respect precedents like Roe that have been reaffirmed repeatedly by the court.

He said such precedents should not be overturned without good reason. But Alito refused to say that the abortion question was “settled law” because, he pointed out, numerous abortion-related issues are currently in litigation.

Alito said he has been able to keep his private views on religion and morality separate from his deliberations as a judge: “My religious beliefs are important in my private life, but my obligation as a judge is to interpret and apply the law.”

Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., questioning Alito about the precedent set in the 1973 Roe case, reminded Alito that the court has reversed more than 200 precedents over the years. “The court got it wrong in some 200 cases. And thank goodness the court’s willing to review various cases,” Brownback said.

Durbin and other Democrats also cited a litany of cases they said showed Alito has a bias in favor of the powerful “established institutions” over the “little guy.” Republicans responded by citing other cases in which Alito ruled for the individual.

“I believe very strongly in treating everybody who comes before me absolutely equal,” said Alito. He said if his record is examined closely, “they will see that there are decisions on both sides.”

Copy the Story Link