A Couple of Random Alito Links

Atrios made a good point this afternoon about Alito and his respect of the rule of law:

When Alito says that no one is above the law it's an utterly meaningless statement if his view of law includes a limitless view of the president's Article II powers which trumps all other laws. Or, as Torture Yoo put it, Bush can crush the testicles of children if he wants to.

In other words, all "no one is above the law" means is that the law, in fact, allows Bush to anything he pleases as long as he claims it's for national security. Including, presumably, lying about blowjobs.

And in Sunday's New York Times (non-subscription) editorial page, the paper called for close questioning of the judge:

He may be able to use [his confirmation hearings] to reassure the Senate that he will be respectful of rights that Americans cherish, but he has a lengthy and often troubling record he will have to explain away. As a government lawyer, he worked to overturn Roe v. Wade. He has disturbing beliefs on presidential power - a critical issue for the country right now. He has worked to sharply curtail Congress's power to pass laws and protect Americans. He may not even believe in "one person one vote."

. . .
While Judge Alito seems intent on expanding the president's power, he has called for sharply reducing the power of Congress.

. . .
Judge Alito said in his 1985 application that he had become interested in constitutional law as a student partly because of his opposition to the Warren court's reapportionment rulings, which created the "one person one vote" standard.

. . .
The Senate should also explore Judge Alito's honesty. According to a senator he met with, he tried to dismiss his statement about the Constitution's not protecting abortion as merely part of a job application, which suggests he will bend the truth when it suits his purposes. Judge Alito has said he does not recall being in an ultraconservative group called Concerned Alumni of Princeton, which opposed co-education and affirmative action. That is odd, since he boasted of his membership in that same 1985 job application. The tortuous history of his promise to Congress to recuse himself in cases involving the Vanguard companies, which he ultimately failed to do, should also be explored.