Defending Alito
Law Professor Charles Fried defends Judge Alito from some of the sillier attacks being made on his work back in the early '80's when Fried was solicitor general and Alito worked for him.
Fried concludes:
What these episodes illustrate is a man who is not a lawless zealot but a careful lawyer with the professionalism to give legally sound but unwelcome advice. They also show a person who can tell the difference between the law and his own political predilections.
In any case, why do Democrats -- who presumably believed that Ruth Bader Ginsburg could distinguish between an advocacy role (which she held, as general counsel for the ACLU) and the judicial role -- lack similar confidence in Samuel Alito?
Fried concludes:
What these episodes illustrate is a man who is not a lawless zealot but a careful lawyer with the professionalism to give legally sound but unwelcome advice. They also show a person who can tell the difference between the law and his own political predilections.
In any case, why do Democrats -- who presumably believed that Ruth Bader Ginsburg could distinguish between an advocacy role (which she held, as general counsel for the ACLU) and the judicial role -- lack similar confidence in Samuel Alito?
posted by LadybugUSA at 10:34 AM
1 Comments:
Unfortunately, Democrats aren't looking to draw a line between the role of advocate and the role of judge; they are looking to draw a line between a judge who will give them the results they want and a judge who won't.
Post a Comment
<< Home