Executive Session

EXECUTIVE SESSION

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr, President, there are few decisions of more lasting and profound consequence that a U.S. Senator must make than the decision whether to vote to confirm a nominee to a lifetime appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court. Accordingly, I have reviewed the record and the commentary relative to the Samuel Alito nomination with great care and deliberation. The decision on the Alito nomination is more difficult than was the case for now Chief Justice John G. Roberts inasmuch as Judge Alito's long record raises concerns across a broad range of areas. Clearly, he would not have been my pick for the Supreme Court.

Nonetheless, I must conclude that Judge Alito possesses a high level of legal skill, is a man of solid personal integrity, and that his views fall within the mainstream of contemporary conservative jurisprudential thinking. At the conclusion of Senate floor debate, I will oppose any effort to filibuster his nomination, and I will vote to confirm Judge Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court.

While it is not the role of the Senate to ``rubberstamp'' any President's judicial nominations, it is also true that any President's choice deserves due deference. Judge Alito deserves the same deference that Republican Senators accorded the Supreme Court nominees of President Clinton. I am mindful that Justice Ginsberg, a former counsel to the ACLU, was confirmed with 96 Senate votes in her favor.

I do not believe that simple political ideology ought to be a deciding factor so long as the nominee's views are not significantly outside the mainstream of American legal thinking. I also believe that the judicial nomination and confirmation process in recent years has become overly politicized to the detriment of the rule of law.

I am troubled by Judge Alito's apparent views on matters such as Executive power, his past opposition to the principle of one person, one vote, and his narrow interpretation of certain civil rights laws. Even so, I cannot accept an argument that his views are so radical that the Senate is justified in denying his confirmation.

http://thomas.loc.gov/