A word from Susan Sullivan
Yesterday I wrote about Judge Alito's former law clerk Susan Sullivan (1990-91). Susan has kindly forwarded us a copy of her op-ed on Judge Alito's nomination. While we don't share Susan's political perspective, the recollections of her work for Judge Alito are timely:
Most efforts at evaluating the nomination of Samuel Alito to the United States Supreme Court have fallen along predictable party lines. By opposing the nomination however, my fellow liberals and I run the real danger of shooting ourselves in our own left foot.Sincere thanks to Susan granting us permission to post her column here.I was one of Judge Alito's law clerks in 1990-1991, the year the Casey decision was decided. I consider myself a social progressive. I am a card carrying member of the ACLU, a liberal pro-choice advocate who supports abortion rights. I favor gun control support gay marriage and oppose the death penalty. I don't have a problem if you want to take "God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance. In short, no one is likely to mistake me for a conservative any time soon. Yet, I support the nomination of Judge Alito because I know from having worked closely with him that he is not a political ideologue and is not intent on advancing a conservative political agenda.
As a liberal, what scares me is not the prospect of having Sam Alito on the Supreme Court; what scares me is the way my fellow Liberal Democrats are behaving in response to the nomination. I’m appalled and embarrassed by the fear mongering, the personal attacks and what I see as an irresponsible and misleading distortion of his real judicial record as well as his character. Now the threat of a filibuster lurks and Senator Kennedy’s tirade about documents being concealed, seems like little more than a pretext to justify a filibuster.In light of the Alito feeding frenzy, I feel compelled as a liberal and a former clerk to speak out and attempt to offer a different perspective to perhaps stem or at least counter what I see as a short sighted, ill considered and counter productive attack strategy, made, sadly, by the very same liberal groups whose mission and philosophy I ordinarily support, and embrace. I did not want to be part of the spin, but I don’t know how to stop it except to say what I know and hope some will hear it.
In all candor, I expect that if I did not know the Judge, I may have responded to the nomination with the same distrust, fear and suspicion with which I usually respond to everything the Bush Administration does, so I understand the genesis of the attacks by my fellow liberals. However, having worked closely with the Judge, I know that he is not a political ideologue intent on advancing a conservative political agenda. If he were, we would not have the decisions in which he reached or supported "liberal" outcomes. These include pro choice decisions that affirmed and applied Roe v. Wade, as well as cases favoring plaintiffs bringing discrimination suits, cases that ruled in favor of criminal defendants, or a case that expanded a women's rights to seek political asylum on the basis of gender. These are just not the results you would expect to see if he were a conservative ideologue.
In my experience, having worked closely with him, Judge Alito never allowed his personal or political opinions to dictate the outcome in any case irrespective of its subject matter. On the contrary, he approached every case, including Casey, thoughtfully and carefully. He was always open to discussion and argument and always willing to listen and consider all relevant points of view. Judge Alito heard thousands of cases and wrote hundreds of opinions. Cherry picking “sensational” cases is at best unhelpful. Oversimplifying and mischaracterizing his record serves no one. Making unfounded personal attacks to insinuate he is racist or sexist is not only personally offensive to me as one who knows him, it denigrates the entire proceeding.
At this point we Democrats should be playing chess, not checkers. The threat of a filibuster, is not only premature, it's short sighted. Consider this: Democrats' attempts to filibuster Alito are successful because some Republicans are reluctant to change the long standing rules of the Senate. Consequently, Alito's nomination fails. Check! In his place, President Bush then nominates a true conservative ideologue. We Democrats would most certainly want desperately to filibuster such a choice but would be unable to do so because now those same Republicans who were reluctant to change the rules beforehand, would be frustrated by what they would see as Democrats' serial filibustering, and so they would now exercise the "constitutional" option and change the rules. No filibuster and we liberals end up with a super conservative justice on the court. Check mate! Now that's the really scary outcome.I believe we need to tread carefully, temper our partisan distrust and think carefully before reflexively voicing outrage. Otherwise, we may actually undermine our own best "liberal" interests as well as the interests of everyone else. If you really want a Judge who will approach each case carefully thoughtfully and will reach a decision irrespective of his own personal or political agenda, please don’t “f” Judge Alito.
Susan Sullivan is an attorney in San Francisco. She was Judge Alito's law clerk in 1990 - 1991, the year in which Planned Parenthood v. Casey was decided.
UPDATE: Townhall has also posted Susan's colum: "Liberal former Alito clerk: Don't 'f' Alito.".
