« It's So Crazy, It Just Might Work. | Main | It's Alito »
October 28, 2005
Sam Alito, As I Knew Him.
Sam Alito was the U.S. Attorney who hired me into the Appeals Division of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey back in 1989. He was still there as U.S. Attorney when I started at the office in early 1990, but left a few months later to join the Third Circuit.
I had nowhere near the exposure to Alito that I had to his replacement, Michael Chertoff, but I had enough time to form an impression.
He is cerebral. He is very, very smart. In small-ish interpersonal settings he comes off as a bit shy and a touch awkward. (I say that this is so only in small-ish settings because I once saw him deliver a speech, at his farewell dinner, actually, and in that setting, speaking to a big crowd, he was remarkably at ease and exceedingly funny.) He seems younger than his years; there is a boyishness to him. Because his nature is reserved, I found him tough to read for politics. I knew, of course, that his conservative pedigree was impressive, but it was not something he wore on his sleeve.
I'll share my one amusing Sam Alito story. When he left the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Third Circuit, those of us in the Appeals Division decided to give him a going-away present. You know those office ink-pad stamps that say "CANCELLED" or "DRAFT" or "RECEIVED" or whatever? We had one made that said "AFFIRMED," to make Sam's job in criminal appeals that much easier. A little prosecutor's in-joke, you know?
A few months later, an unmarked envelope arrived for us in the Appeals Division. Inside was a slip opinion of the first criminal appeal Judge Alito had heard, with the word "AFFIRMED" stamped about 20 times all over the front page.
We never did figure out who it was from.
UPDATE: I should note that the opinion we received in the mail with the "AFFIRMED" stamp all over it was not in a case litigated by our office. As I recall, Sam Alito recused himself from all cases that had been pending during his tenure as U.S. Attorney in New Jersey, and even from those that followed his tenure as U.S. Attorney for a period of many months, if not more.
Posted by Eric at October 28, 2005 7:33 PM
Comments
that is so hilarious - and so endearingly human!
Posted by: hi at October 28, 2005 10:49 PM
So, you *want* to get a subpeona from the Judiciary Committee? You obviously know too much. And AFFIRMED is obviously code for his true feelings about Roe and Griswald.
Posted by: K at October 28, 2005 11:20 PM
Apparently he's the one.
Posted by: Cathy Young at October 31, 2005 6:42 AM
The story about sending a copy of the first criminal appeal with affirmed stamped all over is revealing. It proves that Alito didn't let his judicial role interfere with his prosecutorial mindset. Speaking as someone who clerked for a federal appeals court judge, I have to say I find that kind of prosecutorial jokiness from a judge to be both appalling and fundamentally inconsistent with a true judicial temperament.
Posted by: Clif at October 31, 2005 11:30 AM
the feminazis hate him; the slimy Chuck Schumer is uncomfortable with him and Nancy Pelosi and Dianne Feinstein are outraged that he won't be legislating from the bench (plus, the eminently forgettable Arlen Specter is tepid in his assessment).
Clearly, Judge Alito has the integrity, the decency, the intelligence and the compassion to be a brilliant associate justice.
Posted by: bk at October 31, 2005 1:56 PM
Clif's comment from the mainstream of the Left fever swamp perfectly illustrates the fact that all joy and humor will depart form this life if that gang were ever to succeed sufficiently in finding enough voters to buy off with OPM to get elected.
Easy to see why no one wants him inside the tent.
Posted by: MNKurmudge at October 31, 2005 2:27 PM
Will Alito be Bill Bennett's worst nightmare?
Imagine Roe V Wade being overturned, and all those future "criminals" being turned loose to become muggers just as Bennett enters his late 70's.
Posted by: Chuck at October 31, 2005 2:38 PM
Clif,
You need a funny bone transplant. Yours has obviously atrophied.
Posted by: Scaldis Noel at October 31, 2005 2:52 PM
Certainly you are entitled to an opinion. My question, for it is in my nature (which transcends my cerebral characteristics and intellectual conditioning) to question things, is why are you saying these things? And, to what end? The world continues to spirals out of control at an increasing rate of velocity. We have jumped from the 100-story building, and as we pass floor 50, we say "hmm, so far, so good" Shame.
Posted by: MM at October 31, 2005 2:52 PM
Lighten up, Cliff.
Posted by: dave at October 31, 2005 3:07 PM
Speaking as someone who clerked for a federal judge who was also a former US attorney, I have to say that someone who finds the innocuous "affirmed stamp" joke to be "both appalling and fundamnetally inconsistent with a true judicial temperment" must be utterly humourless. Judges are not machines, they're human beings. Nothing in the story above suggests Judge Alito allowed a harmless joke with his former colleagues to influence his decision in a real case. Get over it.
Posted by: Angela at October 31, 2005 3:13 PM
I do not think that this scenario reflects anything about Alito being one way or another for serving on the Supreme Court. I ask, are you trying to make it seem like because of this one instance he "is a great guy" so support him?
Posted by: Andrea at October 31, 2005 5:46 PM
...out of whose control? Presumably yours, or you wouldn't be so unhappy.
Be comforted that the free market and democracy are increasingly running things, with an aggregate intelligence billions of times greater than yours (despite the occasional success of a Billy Ray Cyrus here and there).
The first step towards inner tranquility, if you're a liberal, is to let go of your need to control your fellow man and confiscate his earned wealth. The irony is: if you can kick that urge, you'll cease to be a liberal.
Posted by: Jonathan at October 31, 2005 9:33 PM
The whole "activist" label is such a joke. Justice Douglas exercised judicial restraint when he deferred to Congress and he was by any definition a liberal....and one hated by the Bork crowd because of Griswold. Recently the Court was encouraged by social conservatives to intervene in the Sciavo case...pretty activist.
"Restraint" or "activism" is a nice label to get ones guy in, whether left or right, to move policy in ones direction. The application of these labels is kind of silly, but it works on the idiots who watch TV news
Posted by: Rob at November 1, 2005 1:21 AM
I am very happy Bush has nominated Alito! All the best!
Posted by: Valentin Rimdjonok at November 1, 2005 1:34 AM
Another one from the Illuminati gang? Mmmmmm, now, when Prince Charles, the antichrist, pops on over here to dance and dine with Bush, we can all expect to face the East, bow 10 times before we get our paychecks and then chant "Bush, Bush, Bush! Cheney should be fired. Alito is a puppet. And, you all have been brainwashed into believing you are smart. You haven't seen nothing yet. The best is yet to come....I will be back to give you more...soon.....Don't bother replying to this, as I doubt I will read your replies......you have way too much time on your hands.
Posted by: Sherry at November 1, 2005 8:03 PM
I'm not thrilled by what I know of Alito so far, but I appreciate the story told here. Both the touch of humor and the idea that his appearance of intelligence is not misleading.
I'm...going to wait and see what develops.
Posted by: Anne at November 1, 2005 8:37 PM
I think that Alito has exactly what we need in our Supreme Court today. He is qualified with almost 30 yrs of experience in the legal court and he holds a conservative view. I hope he gets nominated!!!
q: Why do so many oppose Alito while he holds the same views and almost the same credentials as Roberts?
Posted by: Amy at November 1, 2005 11:56 PM
Amy, your question presumes the same people who oppose Alito did not and do not oppose Roberts. Hmmm. Be careful with those presumptions.
Posted by: Issa at November 3, 2005 6:59 PM
Yes! I am praying that he is confirmed, only so that I can watch as more of my so-called rights as a US citizen are pissed on and dissolved away. This should have nothing to do with any kind of partisan bull5h1t(Excuse me If I offended anyone with my outright use of [censored] freedom of speech). It has more to do with where you want our country to be in the future. Ask yourselves: Are you for civil liberties or do you support an all powerful government? Would you uphold the [possibly pedophilic and definitely unnecessary] strip search of a 10 year old girl and her mother when they were not named in the warrant? What if that was YOUR 10 year old daughter that was violated? What if this was a supreme court case and it became legal to do this all over the country?
Another Question to ask yourselves: Would you uphold the arrest of terminal cancer patients that were crazy enough to seek some relief from the pain that was not physically addictive? Do you agree with the unmonitored spying/data mining of MILLIONS of americans just because you believe the government when they tell you they are all terrorists? Oh sorry, I have helped the enemy [american citizens] by talking about it. Would you uphold the arrest of a 14 year old kid that stole a french fry because she was hungry?Think very hard...
I can't say that there are cases that he has ruled on that I don't agree with, in fact I probably agree with many. However, I realize that it only takes one case to affect our lives for the worse. Thanks ahead of time for all those that feel they have to justify their values by attacking my statements, because that is one of the freedoms that I would like to defend.
"I can see the future, and it is bleak."
-NuLLiFieD
Posted by: NuLL VoiD at January 11, 2006 1:55 AM
"legislating from the bench"
Which of the current judges on the supreme court strikes down the most laws enacted by an elected congress? Know before you speak. Isn't that what they teach at law school?
Posted by: Repent! The end draws nigh. at January 14, 2006 6:10 AM