Justice Alito--How Does He Feel About Dems?

Earlier this week we discussed Justice Alito's recent address to the Federalist Society. I admit, I have listened to or read the entire address. Today I came across an excerpt in which Alito discusses a 2nd Amendment case that the SCOTUS decided was moot. But what Alito is really talking about is a brief that was filed by several Dem senators--and to which he took great umbrage. You can agree or disagree with Alito on this. My point is simply this: Alito will likely be be taking part in one or more decisions with regard to the election. If you were a Dem--and in light of these expressed views (below)--how would you feel about arguing your case to the SCOTUS, knowing that Alito and several other justices who agreed with Alito on the 2nd Amendment case also agree with Alito on the Pennsylvania supreme court's rewrite of the PA election law? And by the way, what do you think Alito thinks of Roberts, CJ?

Five United States senators who filed a brief in support of the city went further. They wrote that the Supreme Court is a sick institution, and that if the court did not mend its ways, well, it might have to be quote, restructured.

Afterwards receiving this warning, the court did exactly what the city and the Senators wanted. It held that the case was moot. And it said nothing about the Second Amendment.

Three of us protested, but to no avail. Now, let me be clear, again, I’m not suggesting that the court’s decision was influenced by the senators’ threat. But I am concerned that the outcome might be viewed that way by the Senators and others with thoughts of bullying the court.

This little episode, I’m afraid may provide a foretaste of what the Supreme Court will face in the future. And therefore, I don’t think it can simply be brushed aside. The Senators’ brief was extraordinary. I could say something about standards of professional conduct. But the brief involved something even more important. It was an affront to the Constitution and the rule of law.

Let’s go back to some basics. The Supreme Court was created by the Constitution, not by Congress. under the Constitution, we exercise the judicial power of the United States. Congress has no right to interfere with that work any more than we have the right to legislate. Our obligation is to decide cases based on the law period. And it is therefore wrong for anybody, including members of Congress to try to influence our decisions by anything other than legal argumentation.

That sort of thing is often happened in countries governed by power, not law. The Supreme Court Justice from one such place recounted what happened when his court was considering a case that was very important to those in power. He looked out the window and saw a tank pull up and point its gun toward the court. message was clear, the slide the right way. Or the courthouse might be, shall we say, restructured?

That was a crude threat. But all threats and inducements are intolerable. Judges dedicated to the rule of law have a clear duty. They cannot compromise principle or rationalize any departure from what they are obligated to do. And I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not do that in the years ahead.

I'll bet Alito thinks anything that smacks of stealing an election is "an affront to the Constitution and the rule of law."