WASHINGTON (ABP) — Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito has reportedly downplayed comments he made 20 years ago strongly opposing abortion and Supreme Court precedents on church-state issues.
The comments, publicized Nov. 15, came in a letter he wrote in 1985 when applying to a higher position in the Justice Department. The document was among hundreds of pages of Alito's writings from his time as a young attorney in the Reagan administration.
The news immediately stiffened opposition to Alito among liberal advocacy groups. But Alito sought to downplay those as the words of somebody applying for a political appointment, according to Democratic senators he met with on Nov. 15.
In the letter, which Alito wrote to then-Attorney General Ed Meese, he said he was “particularly proud” of his earlier work for the department in arguing that “the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion.”
Alito also said his interest in law had been spurred by his strong personal disagreement with several decisions that the Supreme Court, led by then-Chief Justice Earl Warren, made in the 1950s and '60s on issues, including the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. That clause bars the government from “respecting an establishment of religion.” The Warren Court decided that government-sanctioned prayer and devotional Bible reading in public primary and secondary schools violated the Establishment Clause.
Democrats who met with Alito after the news said he claimed the sentiments expressed in the letter would not prejudge how he would deal with individual cases if confirmed to the high court.
“He said, first of all, it was different then,” Senate Judiciary Committee member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) told reporters after her Nov. 15 meeting with Alito. “He said, 'I was an advocate seeking a job, it was a political job, and that was 1985. I'm now a judge, I've been on the circuit court for 15 years, and it's very different. I'm not an advocate, I don't give heed to my personal views. What I do is interpret the law.'”
Republican senators also sought to downplay Alito's comments as those of an aspiring political appointee. He ended up getting a promotion to deputy assistant attorney general under Meese. They noted that, during his 15 years as a judge on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Alito has had a mixed record on cases dealing with abortion rights and religious freedom, generally following Supreme Court precedent.
However, as some commentators across the political spectrum have observed, lower judges are constrained to follow Supreme Court precedent while Supreme Court justices have the authority to overturn their own court's previous decisions.
“What [Alito] said, if you'll pardon the strict construction here, is that there is no constitutional right to an abortion. Which is a viewpoint, if agreed to by five Supreme Court justices, that can change the law, and social fabric, of the land,” Harold Meyerson wrote in his Nov. 16 Washington Post column. “Deference to precedents may be a pillar of the law, but — and on this, conservatives and liberals agree — it is clearly less of one for Supreme Court justices than for appellate and trial judges.”