Obama Video Clips >
2006-01-26 - Barack Obama on Confirmation of Samuel Alito - Senate Debate on
Empathy
TOPIC: Confirmations
Thursday, January 26, 2006
Floor Statement on the Confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito, Jr.
First off, let me congratulate Senators Specter and Leahy for moving yet another
confirmation process along with a civility that speaks well of the Senate.
As we all know, there's been a lot of discussion in the country about how the
Senate should approach this confirmation process. There are some who believe
that the President, having won the election, should have the complete authority
to appoint his nominee, and the Senate should only examine whether or not the
Justice is intellectually capable and an all-around nice guy. That once you get
beyond intellect and personal character, there should be no further question
whether the judge should be confirmed.
I disagree with this view. I believe firmly that the Constitution calls for the
Senate to advise and consent. I believe that it calls for meaningful advice and
consent that includes an examination of a judge's philosophy, ideology, and
record. And when I examine the philosophy, ideology, and record of Samuel Alito,
I'm deeply troubled.
I have no doubt that Judge Alito has the training and qualifications necessary
to serve. He's an intelligent man and an accomplished jurist. And there's no
indication he's not a man of great character.
But when you look at his record - when it comes to his understanding of the
Constitution, I have found that in almost every case, he consistently sides on
behalf of the powerful against the powerless; on behalf of a strong government
or corporation against upholding American's individual rights.
If there is a case involving an employer and an employee and the Supreme Court
has not given clear direction, he'll rule in favor of the employer. If there's a
claim between prosecutors and defendants, if the Supreme Court has not provided
a clear rule of decision, then he'll rule in favor of the state. He's rejected
countless claims of employer discrimination, even refusing to give some
plaintiffs a hearing for their case. He's refused to hold corporations
accountable numerous times for dumping toxic chemicals into water supplies, even
against the decisions of the EPA. He's overturned a jury verdict that found a
company liable for being a monopoly when it had over 90% of the market share at
the time.
It's not just his decisions in these individual cases that give me pause - it's
that decisions like these are the rule for Samuel Alito, not the exception.
When it comes to how checks and balances in our system are supposed to operate -
the balance of power between the Executive Branch, Congress, and the Judiciary,
Judge Alito consistently sides with the notion that a President should not be
constrained by either Congressional acts or the check of the Judiciary. He
believes in the overarching power of the President to engage in whatever the
President deems to be appropriate policy. As a consequence of this, I'm
extraordinarily worried about how Judge Alito might approach issues like
wiretapping, monitoring of emails, or other privacy concerns that we've seen
surface over the last several months.
In sum, I've seen an extraordinarily consistent attitude on the part of Judge
Alito that does not uphold the traditional role of the Supreme Court as a
bastion of equality and justice for United States citizens.
Should he be confirmed, I hope that he proves me wrong. I hope that he shows the
independence that I think is absolutely necessary in order for us to preserve
our liberties and protect our citizens.
Facebook
Youtube
Newsletter
What's New?
Discussion List
Conference
Contact
