Parties Matter: Supreme Court Confirmation Process Proves Party Power

Do you vote for the person and not the party? A lot of us think we do. But the Supreme Court confirmation process demonstrates just how powerful parties can be, because in our system, majority rules.

In the primaries you get to vote for the person, but in the general election, you’re voting for the whole party, so it’s important to choose the party that most closely reflects your values.

For more on party philosophies, click here.

Alito confirmation

On January 24, 2005, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 10-8 along party lines to confirm Samuel A. Alito Jr. to the Supreme Court to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.

Lawmakers sometimes vote against their party, and before the confirmation hearings, many wondered whether Senator Arlen Specter (Pennsylvania), a Republican in favor of abortion rights, would vote against Alito. In the end, Specter voted to confirm Alito along with his Republican colleagues.

For more on Alito on abortion and the confirmation hearings, click here.

Specter and abortion

Arlen Specter is a pro-choice Republican, but has said that he does not confirm or deny judicial nominees based on the abortion question. That statement clashes with his New York Times editorial on the Roberts nomination where he said, "In this battle, the central issue remains Roe v. Wade."

In that same editorial, Specter also pointed out that "confirmation precedents forcefully support the propriety of a nominee declining to spell out how he or she would vote on a specific case. Abraham Lincoln is reputed to have said pretty much the same thing: ‘We cannot ask a man what he will do, and if we should and he should answer us, we would despise him. Therefore, we must take a man whose opinions are known.’"

Both Specter and Lincoln make a good case for protecting nominees from answering direct questions about how they would rule in a certain case. But since it‘s not a law, but rather precedent or tradition that reinforces the rule, it is worth asking, have times changed enough to where judicial nominees need to answer directly about their published views and beliefs and is that different from telling us how they would rule in hypothetical cases that may come up before the Supreme Court?

The committee’s points of view

Senate Judiciary Committee members had very different ideas about Judge Alito. Democrats felt that his philosophy was too outside the mainstream to be part of the Supreme Court. Republicans argued that Alito was superbly qualified and that there were no fair reasons to deny him a position on the Court.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D- California) made the point that citizens and lawmakers in favor of abortion rights simply cannot support Alito. Senator Orrin Hatch (R- Utah) argued that Alito proved he was impartial in the abortion matter and in general.

Democratic Senators Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Charles Schumer of New York felt that Alito was deliberately vague in his responses to committee members’ questions. Leahy and Schumer maintained that Alito didn’t convince them that he would be an effective constitutional check on the executive branch.

However, Senator Charles Grassley (R- Iowa) claimed that committee members must have faith in the confirmation process and that it’s unfair to expect a nominee to predict how he or she will rule in future cases.

Party power

It’s interesting to note that the committee did not vote along party lines during the confirmation process for Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. Three committee Democrats, including Patrick Leahy, Russell Feingold, and Herb Kohl, voted to confirm Roberts.

Nevertheless, the party in power tends to have the command they need to confirm justices, pass laws, and change the direction of the nation.

Make no mistake: Parties are important. If you want government to meet your needs and protect your values, you need to align yourself with the party whose policies are most in line with your philosophy and what is right for you.

Contact your representatives before they vote on Alito on Friday, January 27, 2006.

Your input matters

Do you vote for the person or the party? Which party most closely reflects your beliefs and goals? What kind of justice do you want on the Supreme Court? What do you think of Alito and why?

Your representatives in Congress DO care what you think. Especially now -- 2006 is an election year and many representatives will be looking to reconnect with their constituents. Let your congressmen and women know what you think! Give your senators a piece of your mind! To find your reps, click here.

About WomenMatter

WomenMatter is a place to discuss life issues with other women. We don’t want to wedge women apart, but rather bring them together to dialogue. To participate in our blog, click here.

WomenMatter is the place where we can take one issue at a time, match what we do about it every day of our lives to the facts of the bigger system that we all live in and recognize that every idea for making it better has tradeoffs.

WomenMatter is dedicated to empowering women to participate in the political process. To do this we have invested in the most in-depth NONPARTISAN information, because we trust each woman to make up her own mind.

• We track nine issues every week and update this website several times a week.
• We launch after school GirlsMatter Clubs in middle and high schools to grow the next generation of politically aware women through a full curriculum and startup kit on girlsmatter.com.
• We do continuous research to make sure that we are meeting the needs of women across the country of all ages, races, incomes, preferences, and religions.

We offer all our services free of charge without memberships or subscriptions. To help us maintain this work - not just in election years but as a continuing part of women’s lives - please make a tax deductible donation, click here.

Posted on: 1/26/2006