Samuel Alito: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:25, 1 February 2006

Justice Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. (born April 1, 1950) is an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States. He was nominated to the post by President George W. Bush on October 31, 2005 and confirmed by the Senate on January 31, 2006 by a vote of 58-42. He was sworn in at the Court a little more than an hour after his confirmation, becoming the Court's 110th Justice. Prior to joining the Supreme Court, Alito served as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit from 1990 to 2006.

Personal life

File:Alitocollege.jpg

Alito's "prophetic" personal-statement in the 1972 Princeton yearbook: "Sam intends to go to law school and eventually to warm a seat on the Supreme Court."

Alito was born in Trenton, New Jersey to Italian American parents Samuel A. Alito, Sr., and his wife, the former Rose Fradusco. He is Roman Catholic.

Alito attended Steinert High School in Hamilton and graduated from Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs with a Bachelor of Arts in 1972 before attending Yale Law School, where he served as editor on the Yale Law Journal and earned a Juris Doctor in 1975.

Alito's father, who is now deceased, was a high school teacher and then became the first Director of the New Jersey Office of Legislative Services, a position he held from 1952 to 1984. Alito's mother is a retired schoolteacher. Alito's sister, Rosemary, is regarded as one of New Jersey's top employment lawyers.

At Princeton, Alito led a student conference in 1971 called "The Boundaries of Privacy in American Society" which, among other things, supported curbs on domestic intelligence gathering, called for the legalization of sodomy, and urged for an end to discrimination against homosexuals in hiring by employers (see [1]). During the conference, Alito stated that "no private sexual act between consenting adults should be forbidden."

Alito was a member of the Concerned Alumni of Princeton, which formed in October 1972 against Princeton's decisions regarding affirmative action. Apart from Alito's written 1985 statement of membership of CAP on a job application, which Alito says was truthful, there is no other evidence of Alito's involvement with or contributions in the group. Alito has cited the banning and subsequent mistreatment of ROTC by the university as his reason for belonging to CAP.

While a sophomore at Princeton, Alito received the (low) lottery number of 32, in a Selective Service drawing on December 1, 1969. In 1970, he became a member of the school's Army ROTC program, attending a six-week basic summer camp that year at Fort Knox, Kentucky, in lieu of having been in ROTC during his first two years in college. Graduating in 1972, Alito left a sign of his lofty aspirations in his yearbook, which said that he hoped to "eventually warm a seat on the Supreme Court." ^[2]

He was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the U.S. Army Signal Corps after his graduation and assigned to the United States Army Reserve, one of nine in his class to receive a commission in the Reserve. Following his graduation from Yale Law School in 1975, he served on active duty from September to December 1975, while attending the Officer Basic Course for Signal Corps officers at Fort Gordon, Georgia. The remainder of his time in the Army was served in the inactive Reserves. He had the rank of Captain when he received an Honorable Discharge in 1980 (see [3], [4]).

Standing in front of a portrait of former President Bill Clinton, Martha Alito (right), daughter Laura (left) and son Philip (center) look on as President Bush announces Samuel Alito's nomination on October 31, 2005

Since 1985, Alito has been married to Martha-Ann Bomgardner, once a law librarian with family roots in Oklahoma. They live in West Caldwell, New Jersey and have two children: Philip and Laura.

Judge Alito's friends have described him as "a studious, diligent, scholarly judge with a first-rate mind and a deadpan sense of humor, a neutral arbiter who does not let personal beliefs affect his legal judgments." (see [5])

Career

1976 – 1977 — Law clerk for Leonard I. Garth of the Third Circuit.
1977 – 1981 — Assistant United States Attorney, District of New Jersey.
1981 – 1985 — Assistant to Solicitor General Rex E. Lee.
1985 – 1987 — Deputy Assistant to Attorney General Edwin Meese.
1987 – 1990 — United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey.
1990 – 2006 — Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
1999 – 2004 — Adjunct Professor of Law at Seton Hall University School of Law in Newark, New Jersey.
2006 – (current) — Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

File:Alitobw.jpg

Alito upon his induction as a U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals judge, 1990

Alito argued twelve cases before the Supreme Court for the federal government during his tenure as assistant to the Solicitor General. While serving as an attorney for New Jersey, he prosecuted many cases that involved drug trafficking and organized crime [6].

In his 1985 application for Deputy Assistant to the Attorney General, Alito espoused conservative views, naming William F. Buckley, Jr., the National Review, Alexander Bickel, and Barry Goldwater's 1964 presidential campaign as major influences. He also expressed concern about Warren Court decisions in the areas of criminal procedure, the Establishment Clause, and reapportionment. He stated he was proud to prepare cases arguing that "racial and ethnic quotas should not be allowed and that the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion." [7]

Alito was nominated by George H. W. Bush on February 20 1990 to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Alito was rated by the American Bar Association as "Well Qualified" at the time of his nomination. He was confirmed by unanimous consent in the Senate on April 27 1990 [8]. As a Third Circuit judge, his chambers were in Newark, New Jersey.

As adjunct professor at Seton Hall University School of Law, Alito has taught courses in Constitutional law and an original course on terrorism and civil liberties. In 1995, Judge Alito was presented with that law school's Saint Thomas More Medal, "in recognition of his outstanding contributions to the field of law." [9]

He is known for his judicially conservative rulings. In one of his most well-known opinions, he dissented in a 2–1 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1991. In that case, he voted to uphold a Pennsylvania law that required women to inform their husbands before having an abortion, noting that the law allowed certain exceptions, such as an abusive spouse. In a complex vote, chiefly resulted from division of 5-4, the Supreme Court struck down the law in 1992. In another case, Alito's dissent found it lawful for law enforcement officers in possession of a valid search warrant to perform strip searches on persons on the premises who were identified in the officers' attached affidavit, but not in the warrant itself (in this case a woman and 10 year old girl). Lawrence Lustberg, a criminal defense attorney and friend of Alito, says that he is "very prosecutorial from the bench. He has looked to be creative in his conservatism, which is, I think, as much a Rehnquist as a Scalia trait." [10]

Nomination to U.S. Supreme Court

Samuel Alito acknowledges his nomination, with President George W. Bush looking on.

President Bush nominated Alito to the position of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court on October 31, 2005, to fill the expected vacancy of the seat then held by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, following a formal declaration of her intent to resign. Alito was the third nominee to O'Connor's seat. Following O'Connor's announcement, on July 1, 2005, that she would retire, it was widely reported that Alito had been narrowly passed over as her replacement; President Bush instead nominated John Roberts, who was then re-nominated to fill William Rehnquist's post following the Chief Justice's death on September 3. On October 3, White House counsel and Bush confidante Harriet Miers was nominated to fill O'Connor's spot. Miers withdrew her acceptance of the nomination on October 27 after encountering widespread opposition.

Alito was initially interviewed for a potential appointment in 2001, by then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales. He was again interviewed on May 5, 2005, by Vice President Dick Cheney, Gonzales (now Attorney General), White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Karl Rove, Miers, and Cheney's chief of staff I. Lewis Libby. Bush interviewed him in person on July 14, 2005. [11]

In announcing Alito's nomination, Bush stated, "He's scholarly, fair-minded and principled and these qualities will serve him well on the highest court in the land. [His record] reveals a thoughtful judge who considers the legal merits carefully and applies the law in a principled fashion. He has a deep understanding of the proper role of judges in our society. He understands judges are to interpret the laws, not to impose their preferences or priorities on the people." [12] Alito, in accepting the nomination, said, "Federal judges have the duty to interpret the Constitution and the laws faithfully and fairly, to protect the constitutional rights of all Americans, and to do these things with care and with restraint, always keeping in mind the limited role that the courts play in our constitutional system. And I pledge that if confirmed I will do everything within my power to fulfill that responsibility." [13]

Judge Alito was unanimously rated "well qualified" to fill the Associate Justice post by the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary. The committee rates judges as "qualified," "not qualified," or "well qualified." [14] The ABA rating is meant to measure judicial temperament, not whether a judge's rulings will follow public opinion.

Alito's confirmation hearing was held from Monday, January 9, 2006, to Friday, January 13. On Tuesday, January 24, his nomination was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on a 10-8 party line vote. Debate on the nomination began in the full Senate on Wednesday, January 25. On January 26, 2006, US Senator and 2004 Presidential candidate John Kerry called for a filibuster against Judge Alito. Kerry explained his decision by stating on his website "the American people know Judge Alito will take our country in the wrong direction, and they expect something to be done about it."[15]. Despite this last minute effort by Senator Kerry,[16] a cloture vote passed to end debate on Monday, January 30, by a 72-25 margin. The next morning, at 11:20 AM, the Senate confirmed Alito to the Supreme Court by a vote of 58-42.[17] Four Democratic senators voted to confirm Alito's appointment:

Robert Byrd (West Virginia)
Kent Conrad (North Dakota)
Tim Johnson (South Dakota)
Ben Nelson (Nebraska)

One Republican, Lincoln Chafee (Rhode Island), voted against the appointment. Of these five Senators who broke with party, all of them came from states that had gone for the presidential candidate of the opposite party in 2004, and only Tim Johnson is not up for re-election in 2006. Shortly afterward, in a private ceremony, Alito was sworn in by Chief Justice John Roberts.

Case history

LexisNexis reports that Alito has written more than 700 opinions.

Federalism

A dissenting opinion in United States v. Rybar, 103 F.3d 273 (3d Cir. 1996), arguing that a U.S. law banning private citizens from owning submachine guns was outside the authority of Congress under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution in light of the then recently decided United States v. Lopez.
A majority opinion in Chittister v. Department of Community & Economic Development, 226 F.3d 223 (3d. Cir. 2000), which held that due to sovereign immunity states could not be sued under the Family and Medical Leave Act.

First Amendment

A majority opinion in Saxe v. State College Area School District, 240 F.3d 200 (3d Cir. 2001) [18], holding that the public school district's anti-harassment policy, which prohibited harassment based on sexual orientation among other criteria, was unconstitutionally overbroad and therefore violated First Amendment guarantees of free speech. Alito wrote: No court or legislature has ever suggested that unwelcome speech directed at another's 'values' may be prohibited under the rubric of anti-discrimination.
A dissenting opinion in Banks v. Beard, 399 F.3d 134 (3d Cir. 2005), arguing that the prison policy prohibiting inmates of a segregated unit from accessing news media or family photographs was not a violation of the First Amendment. Alito reasoned:[19]

[T]here is a "rational" relationship between that restriction and the legitimate penological objective of deterring misconduct. It is "rational" for corrections officials to think that inmates who are not in Level 2 will be deterred from engaging in serious misconduct because they do not want to be transferred to that unit and thus to be subjected to the restrictions that accompany that assignment. It is also "rational" for corrections officials to think that inmates who are in Level 2 will be deterred from engaging in serious misconduct while in that unit because they wish to be transferred out and thus to escape such restrictions.

A majority opinion in Child Evangelism Fellowship of N.J., Inc. v. Stafford Twp. Sch. Dist., 386 F.3d 514 (3d Cir. 2004) involving the Establishment Clause. The court found that a school district could not preclude an evangelical group from distributing its newsletters where the school district permitted other private groups to do the same.
A majority opinion in Blackhawk v. Pennsylvania, 381 F.3d 202 (3d Cir. 2004), involving the Free Exercise Clause. The case involved a Native American's ritual that used black bears. The state denied the plaintiff an exemption to a $200/year exotic wildlife dealer permit to keep the bears under the state's Game and Wildlife Code. The court found that the code invoked strict scrutiny. The majority found the code was "substantially" under-inclusive and did not satisfy strict scrutiny.

A majority opinion [20] in ACLU v. Schundler, 168 F.3d 92 (3d Cir. 1999), addressing the circumstances under which a government-sponsored holiday display may or may not contain religious symbols. The case held that a holiday display consisting solely of religious symbols was impermissible, but a mixed display including both secular and religious symbols was permissible if balanced in a generally secular context. The decision relied on County of Allegheny v. ACLU - a previous Supreme Court decision that had permitted such mixed displays. The ACLU had argued that a previous city display that was ruled unconstitutional because it lacked secular symbols colored the purpose of the new display.

A dissenting opinion in C.H. v. Oliva et al. (3rd Cir., 2000)[21] arguing that the removal and subsequent replacement in "a less conspicuous spot" of a kindergartener's religious themed poster was, at least potentially, a violation of his right to Free Expression

A unanimous opinion in Police v. City of Newark, 1999; [22] allowing Muslim police officers in Newark to keep their beards because "the Department makes exemptions from its policy for secular reasons and has not offered any substantial justification for refusing to provide similar treatment for officers who are required to wear beards for religious reasons."

A unanimous opinion in The Pitt News v. Pappert, 2004, [23] upholding the right of student newspapers to carry alcohol advertisements on First Amendment grounds. "If government were free to suppress disfavored speech by preventing potential speakers from being paid, there would not be much left of the First Amendment. "

Harassment and discrimination

A majority opinion in Williams v. Price, 343 F.3d 223 (3d Cir. 2003), [24] granting a writ of habeas corpus to a black state prisoner after state courts had refused to consider the testimony of a witness who stated that a juror had uttered derogatory remarks about blacks during an encounter in the courthouse after the conclusion of the trial.
A dissenting opinion in Sheridan v. Dupont, 74 F.3d 1439 (3d Cir. 1996)(en banc). [25]. Alito would have required a plaintiff to meet a higher standard of evidence to survive a motion for summary judgment in a sex discrimination case, agreeing with a ruling by the 5th Circuit. Alito earlier wrote the majority opinion when the case was heard before a three-judge panel, [26] expressing a preference for the 5th Circuit's reasoning, but ruling according to 3rd Circuit precedent.
A dissenting opinion in Bray v. Marriott Hotels, 110 F.3d 986 (3d Cir. 1997), [27] arguing that, when a Marriott housekeeping manager sued the hotel chain over being allegedly denied promotion on the basis of race, summary judgment in favor of the defendant was appropriate because the plaintiff had not presented enough evidence to allow a reasonable jury to conclude that every one of the reasons Mariott offered for having promoted someone else was a mere pretext. The majority responded that finding in favor of Marriott would have protected racist employers by “immuniz[ing] an employer from the reach of Title VII if the employer’s belief that it had selected the ‘best’ candidate was the result of conscious racial bias.”

Other case decisions

A majority opinion in Fatin v. INS, 12 F.3d 1233 (3d Cir. 1993), rejecting an Iranian woman's petition for review of a deportation ruling and denying her asylum in the U.S. in spite of her gender and feminist ideas and the human rights issues in her home country. The opinion did establish, however, that women in slightly different situations might be able to establish an asylum claim if they would absolutely refuse to wear Islamic dress and would face death as a result.
A majority opinion in Shore Regional High School Board of Education v. P.S., 381 F.3d 194 (3d Cir. 2004) [28], reinstating an administrative law judge's ruling in favor of parents who claimed the school system's failure to protect their child from bullying justified their placing him in a different high school.
A dissenting opinion in Homar v. Gilbert, 89 F.3d 1009 (3d Cir. 1996), arguing that a state university need not hold a hearing before suspending a campus policeman without pay after he had been arrested on drug charges. The Supreme Court later agreed with Alito.
A majority opinion in Southco, Inc. v. Kanebridge Corp., 390 F.3d 276 (3d Cir. 2004), [29] a copyright case discussing the issue of originality. Alito held that "the creative spark... utterly lacking in [a part's numbering system, and thus] these numbers are examples of works that fall short of the minimal level of creativity required for copyright protection."
A majority opinion in United States v. Lee, 359 F.3d 194 (3rd Cir. 2004). Alito rejected a defendant's argument that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated by the introduction into evidence of a videotape recording of a meeting with an informant who consented to the videotaping.
In a dissent to Doe v. Groody, Alito argued that qualified immunity should have protected police officers from a finding of having violated constitutional rights when they strip-searched a mother and her ten-year-old daughter while carrying out a search warrant that authorized the search of a residence. The mother and daughter were not referred to in the warrant, although the affidavit with the warrant requested permission to "search all occupants of the residence and their belongings." The majority opinion found that the warrant did not grant such permission, arguing that references to the affidavit in the warrant were specific and the omission of the language in question was not found to be the result of an error, clerical or otherwise.[30] This controversial opinion earned Judge Alito the nickname "Strip-Search Sammy" from his detractors.
A defendant who claimed he could not pay his $2.5M debt to his wife was indefinitely imprisoned by a Pennsylvania court. This decision was upheld by the (3d Cir. 2002). Alito wrote the unanimous opinion in Chadwick v. Janecka there is "no federal constitutional bar to Mr. Chadwick's indefinite confinement." [31]

Additional information

Those who compare his ideology to that of conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia have nicknamed him "Scalito" (a portmanteau of "Scalia" and "Alito" that appears to have originated in a 1992 National Law Journal article). The National Italian American Foundation, a bipartisan organization that has supported Nancy Pelosi [39], has stated the use of the "Scalito" nickname "marginalizes [Alito's] outstanding record." [40]

Alito is the eleventh Catholic to serve on the Supreme Court and the fifth on the current Court (along with Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas), creating the first majority-Catholic Supreme Court in history. See also: Demographics of the Supreme Court of the United States. He is also, coincidentally, now first on the list alphabetically of Supreme Court Justices, the first to have a last name beginning in "A." (Henry Baldwin was formerly the first on the list.)

He is a member in good standing of the Federalist Society, a group of conservatives and libertarians dedicated to "reforming the current legal order."

Trivia

When someone asked Alito's mother about his stance on abortion, she replied, "Of course he's against abortion."[41]

Notes

^ "Alito joined conservative alumni group", Daily Princetonian, November 18, 2005
^ "Alito needs to shed his CAP", Daily Princetonian, November 22, 2005
^ "Alito has a record of steady conservatism, reputation for civility", Chicago Tribune, October 31, 2005
^ "The appeals court judge is a contender", Philadelphia Inquirer, July 3, 2005
^ "Alito's conservatism gives Senate clear choice", MSNBC.com, October 31, 2005

References

Bazelon, Emily (Oct. 31, 2005). "Alito v. O'Connor". Slate.
"Bush choice sets up court battle". BBC.
Collins, Ronald K.L. (Oct. 31, 2005). Judge Alito: fairly strong on free expression
Collins, Ronald K.L. (Nov. 3, 2005). Alito as government lawyer: '84 broadcast-regulation case
Dickerson, John (Oct31, 2005). "Ready To Rumble". Slate.
Federal Judicial Center. Judges of the United States (official curriculum vitae).

External links

Profiles

Template:Start U.S. Supreme Court composition Template:U.S. Supreme Court composition court lifespan Template:U.S. Supreme Court composition 2006-present Template:End U.S. Supreme Court composition

@@ Line 119: / Line 119: @@
 He is a member in good standing of the [[Federalist Society]], a group of conservatives and [[libertarianism|libertarian]]s dedicated to "reforming the current legal order."
+== Trivia ==
+When someone asked Alito's mother about his stance on abortion, she replied, "Of course he's against abortion."[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/com-1_19_06_AC.html]
 ==See also==