Cases involving presidential power would be decided in favor of the government, against individuals.

The most important issue before the United States Senate – and the American people – at this moment is whether Judge Samuel Alito should be confirmed as a member of the United States Supreme Court. As an attorney and a concerned American, my answer to that question is no for a number of reasons.

In my opinion, the primary reason for opposing Alito’s confirmation is that he would radicalize the court. The People for the American Way has issued a 156-page report on Alito titled “No One to the Right of Sam Alito on This Court,” which begins its executive summary as follows: “If confirmed as the next associate justice, Judge Samuel A. Alito would bring dramatic, sweeping change to the Supreme Court.”

That change would allow the conservative wing of the court to control the court’s direction for perhaps 30 or more years. This is bad for the country because the legal and philosophical views of Alito – made absolutely clear in more than 15 years worth of appellate opinions, as well as other writings as a government lawyer – are radically inconsistent with the beliefs of the majority of Americans. Having Alito on the Supreme Court would not simply move it slightly to the right. It would change the court in a way that has no precedent in American history.

It is clear, for example, that Alito opposes abortion and does not believe that it has a constitutional basis, notwithstanding that Roe v. Wade has been accepted constitutional precedent for more than 30 years. As a government attorney, Alito wrote that there was no constitutional right to abortion, and he has said and done nothing in the years since to suggest that he would set aside his personal beliefs and follow Roe. Moreover, given the opportunity at the hearings on his nomination, Alito has refused even to characterize Roe as settled law.

Polls have demonstrated that a substantial majority of Americans support Roe v. Wade. It would be inappropriate and damaging to our legal system as a whole to put on the Supreme Court a judge who has demonstrated such hostility toward a woman’s right to choose.

Another reason for opposing Alito is that, over his many years as a lawyer and judge, he has consistently favored the power of the executive branch of the government, and particularly the personal power of the president, over the rights of individual citizens established by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. On this issue, the PFAW report states:

“[T]hroughout his career, Judge Alito has shown a strong predilection to concentrate power in the executive branch and the president, eroding governmental checks and balances and diminishing the rights of private citizens. His record is especially troubling at a time when one party controls all three branches of government and allegations of abuse of power abound – from warrantless wiretapping of American citizens to the unlawful detention and torture of suspects held by the government at home and overseas.”

Many cases raising important issues of presidential power will come before the Supreme Court in the near future. If Alito is on the court, most of those cases will be decided in favor of the government and against individuals, whether those individuals are citizens or “enemy combatants.” Such decisions will curtail our personal rights and give more secret powers to an imperial president, at a critical time when America cannot afford to become a less open and fair society.

The final reason that I oppose Alito’s confirmation is his well-known opposition to the congressional power to regulate polluting industries and to protect all citizens from discrimination based on race, gender, disability and age.

In many decisions and especially in his numerous dissents, Alito has shown that he is not fully committed to protecting these rights. As with his approach to constitutional powers, Alito has revealed a consistent willingness to manipulate established rules of law to tip the scales of justice in favor of corporate and government interests and against the individual. Such a philosophy has no place on any court, let alone the United States Supreme Court.

Nothing in Alito’s testimony at his confirmation hearing suggests that he intends to change or set aside the radically conservative views that have characterized his career as a lawyer and judge. Over the last 30 or more years, the Supreme Court has moved steadily to the right. As currently constituted, Justice O’Connor, herself a conservative, is considered a “moderate” and is the swing vote in many 5-4 decisions. Substituting Alito for O’Connor would push the court much further to the right and out of the mainstream, posing serious danger to the Constitution and our fundamental rights.

Paul Macri is a partner at Berman & Simmons and a member of the Steering Committee of the Maine Lawyers for Democracy.