November 11, 2005

Alito Dishonesty

A story is breaking that makes me seriously question Sam Alito's moral competence for impartial adjudication.

Basically, in his Senate confirmation hearings he listed 3 situations where he would recuse himself from ruling, but he has actually ruled on cases that fall under all 3 categories. (They are discussed in this WaPo article--the two in the headline are cases involving Vanguard and SmithBarney with whom Alito had financial dealings--he had mutual funds in Vanguard and SmithBarney is his mutual fund. The third situation was any case involving his sister's law firm.)

Now he is saying that when he testified under oath when he would recuse himself, he was being "unduly restrictive." A judge that thinks keeping his word and telling the truth are "unduly restrictive" is not a good judge, not a capable judge, and not one that should be sitting on the Supreme Court.

No comments:

Post a Comment