Cantwell will meet with Alito on Monday; what questions should she ask?

[Wordie]

I'm planning to FAX a list of questions to Senator Cantwell, primarily based on an editorial I read a while ago. But maybe my fellow DUers have some even better ideas.

Do you have any ideas of really good questions that Cantwell should ask Judge Alito? Ones that will not allow him to give the usual platitudes for answers?

Here's the excerpt from the article I am planning to send:

CRITICAL QUESTIONS TO ASK JUDGE ALITO!

Dear Senator Cantwell:

I found this excellent editorial, which was published in The State, in South Carolina. ( http://www.thestate.com/mld/state/news/opinion/13690848.htm ). As I understand you will meet with Judge Alito this week, I thought you might want to consider asking him these questions. It is critical that these questions are answered by Judge Alito. Please don't allow him to give evasive answers. If he is unable or unwilling to answer these questions, how can you possibly vote for him, or allow him to be confirmed by not supporting the filibuster?

We Need to Know where Alito Would Steer Court

Judge Samuel Alito’s assurances in the Senate Judiciary hearings that the president is bound by the Constitution and that he (Alito) will only be bound by “the law” skirts several issues of just what the Constitution requires and which rules of law he would apply.

Rather, he should have been asked to respond to the following questions:

1. Does he accept the new “unitary executive” doctrine that the president has almost full power in interpreting what the president can do and cannot do? Or should the Supreme Court, as it determined in Marbury v. Madison (l803), remain the final arbiter on such issues?

2. In what kind of national emergencies may the president override constitutional guarantees to the rights of individuals in the body of the Constitution (the writ of habeas corpus) or the Bill of Rights (no searches without probable cause)?

If these guarantees are to be suspended under conditions of less than total war, is the president required to report to someone outside the court what he has done?

3. Do signing statements issued by the president provide legal grounds for his refusal to enforce specific provisions in the law? How can this policy be distinguished from the line-item veto, which the Supreme Court has already declared an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power?

President Bush claims authority on all the above issues. Some of Judge Alito’s earlier statements and rulings suggest that he accepts similar constitutional doctrines. If so, his appointment could consolidate the turn of the United States in a new authoritarian direction. If so, we should know it now.

BETTY GLAD

Olin Jenkins Professor of Political Science

University of South Carolina

Columbia

******

With these critical questions outstanding, how can any senator vote for Alito, or allow him to be confirmed? Think of the Anti-torture Act, recently passed by Congress with huge non-partisan support. Bush attached a signing statement, essentially nullifying it's intent. Don't you worry that Judge Alito, if confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice, would decide that such clearly illegal acts are constitutional? After all, so many of his writings and speeches support signing statements and other tools to increase the power of the executive. He made a speech to the Federalist Society advocating the unitary executive theory as late as 2001 (he was on the 3rd Circuit Court already by that time); it wasn't just something he proposed as a Reagan White House employee, as has been suggested. Judge Alito must not be confirmed, and I also implore you to support a filibuster effort, as the only way to stop the confirmation.

Sincerely,

XXXX

Can you think of questions to add? I'm hoping to get some good ones!

[rsmith6621]

1. NONE.....

Being one her constituents I think right now her only question should be........Am I worthy of another 6 years.....right now I say NO!!!!

What more is there to ask Alito that needs to be considered.

[leftstreet]

3. Agree!

:toast:

[Wordie]

4. Do you think the theory of the unitary executive is really constitutional?

That's an additional one I thought of (it probably would need to be worded more effectively).

In the hearings, he seemed to avoid revealing some of his extremist views by saying all that stuff about how "nobody is above the law" and that the President had to follow the Constitution (I'm greatly paraphrasing here). And so many people were reassured that he wouldn't decide in ways that dangerously enhanced presidential powers, they thought the answers meant he was mainstream.

But what I think is that he wasn't entirely forthcoming. He said that the president needs to follow the law (and Constitution). BUT, he also believes that the unitary executive theory is completely constitutional, and that under it, the president already has powers significantly greater than what the society and the courts have traditionally thought of him as having. So, he kinda wiggled out of really letting people know how he thinks, by giving an answer that only told half the truth.

[Wheezy]

2. Here's one...

So, Mr. Alito. What do you plan to do after you are NOT CONFIRMED?

[applegrove]

5. Over his career, how many cases has Alito not taken - so that they would

not too well inform others on his beliefs and jeapordize a future Supreme Court nomination?

And what were those cases.

I don't know actually.:shrug:

[Wordie]

6. I thought it interesting that apparently Alito has never ruled on cases

involving executive power of the president. I think it's only the Supreme Court that does that. So that makes a lot of the things he has said about exectutive power all that more meaningful, and worrisome.

[joemurphy]

7. Here are a few:

Would the unitary executive theory insulate a President from secretly wiretapping the conversations of American citizens without first establishing probable cause and obtaining a warrant?

Would the unitary executive theory permit a President to unilaterally abrogate a previously signed treaty -- such as the Geneva Convention, for example -- in the course of an undeclared "War on Terror"?

Would the unitary executive theory permit a President to intentionally violate a duly enacted Federal law?

Does the unitary executive theory permit a President to torture enemy combatants during wartime?

Would the unitary executive theory or the theory of executive privilege permit a President to withhold information requested or subpoenaed by a Congressional investigative committee?

Do you believe that there is a right of privacy?

Do you believe that a right of privacy permits a woman to terminate her pregnancy during the first trimester?

Try those for starters. We already know how he feels about using deadly force in the case of juveniles involved in petty crimes.

[Wordie]

8. Those are really quite good.

I guess he can wiggle out of all of them, by saying that he might have to rule on a case at a later date. But those really are about the theory, and not specific cases. We already know he is still a proponent of the theory, based on that 2001 speech to the Federalist Society. Good approach.

Hmmm. I may use some of those. Thanks.

[Mass]

9. Why she finds Alito better than Roberts?

[msongs]

10. he will lie, will cantwell believe another bush liar? nt

[Wordie]

11. Yeah, I guess that's the best question of all. If he could fool Sen. Byrd,

he probably can fool Cantwell, too.

[Blue Belle]

13. Delete

[Blue Belle]

12. Does he think Roe Vs. Wade...

is settled law? That's one he failed/refused to answer in his hearings.

[Blue Belle]

14. Will Alito fund her re-election campaign...

when her base jerks her funding for votng for him??

[understandinglife]

15. Is it appropriate for a felon to appoint his/her judge?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=267018&mesg_id=267018

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=266396&mesg_id=266396

Senator Cantwell, and all her colleagues (Dems and Repubs) need, to focus on one simple fact, Bush is under investigation for multiple violations of Federal statutes and the Constitution. Until that is resolved, no judicial appointments can legitimately be approved.


Peace.