Also: Consider this post, which suggests Judge "Alito knows the law, but he doesn't seem to know, or care about, The Law." That is, justice. This blends with a Slate discussion involving "law plus," which some (I guess, ala Holmes ... we don't do justice) don't quite like the federal courts to worry about too much. But, the "law of the land" (e.g., equal protection) requires some degree of equity. It is part of "The Law." This is one aspect of some conservatives (after all, they care about spirit when let us say state immunity is at stake) that troubles me.
---
My opposition to Alito is based on ideological grounds. As many have noted, this is a sound reason, even if you disagree with me on the case at hand. Dahlia Lithwick, part of a tag team whose dislike of Alito some see as too strident, suggests the whole CAP matter falls in this area. Since he and his supporters are not willing to come clean, we basically have to read code. CAP is symbolic as was his support of the Bork nomination, which he also now downplays.* His failure to come clean on the matter, or to put it less diplomatically, his lies, only add fuel to the fire.**
I think that is the best way to look at things. Some target his failure to recuse himself if a few cases after promising the committee involved in his appointment to the Third Circuit that he would in all cases related to the specific class at issue. Bar Committee witnesses basically argued today that there really was no fire there. I leave it to others to suggest that they are wrong, but politically at least, that seems to make this something of a non-issue. Alone, I just do not find it worth mentioning too much.
[A bit of inside baseball also is the use of his fellow judges as character witnesses. This is more troubling, especially since Arlen Specter handled the matter and gave it legitimacy, since it sets a bad precedent and raises serious conflict of interest rules. More so than a few cases out of thousands that surely was not intentionally taken.]
The tendency to focus on other things and avoid what really is involved almost implies the fact ridiculed by the satire I linked above: that ideology does not really matter, only neutral qualification issues. But, the reason why Alito should fall ... and why a significant number of Dems will vote against him ... is not because he did not recuse himself or even his use of CAP (though that does help them). It is his ideology. So, let's -- unlike Bush on down -- be honest about the fact. And, forthrightly argue that it is okay to base our opposition basically on that.
---
* Justices White and Stevens supported the Bork nomination. The point, however, is that in Alito's case that he strongly expressed support and now does not want to admit to it. He just did it to support his bosses. Sure.
** What rankles is the phoniness. Alito put it on his application, along with the Federalist Society (the only two groups ... how telling), clearly because he thought it would advance his career. DL thought it upsetting to have to rub his nose in what it stood for. But, I think not. He used it, he has to pay the piper. The judge's blathering on the matter makes one even less sympathetic.
[Sort of reminds me of Bush senior's disaste of dirty politics, but feeling it a necessary evil ... the fact he was a nice guy does not remove responsibility for the tactics he allowed his agents to use.]