Geoffrey R. Stone, a professor of law at the University of Chicago, has offered his view that the Senate should not confirm Judge Alito. Here’s the critical link in his argument: “Whatever else Judge Alito may or may not have made clear about his views on such issues as abortion, federalism, and religious freedom, he has certainly made clear that he has no interest in restraining the acts of this commander-in-chief.” Unfortunately, Stone does not see fit to offer a single piece of evidence in support of this contention. All he offers is his naked assertion.
Has Stone actually examined Alito’s record? Might he even deign to try to put together something resembling an argument on this point?
I’m not familiar with Stone, but it’s clear from his bio that, in addition to strong leftist credentials, he’s a very distinguished legal academic: among other things, former dean of the law school at the University of Chicago and former provost of the entire university. That someone so distinguished in legal academia could publish an argument so defective on such an important matter is further evidence of the low intellectual standards among liberal academics.
I’d bet that Stone’s statement is nothing more than a political favor to Senator Durbin or Senator Obama. Look to see them citing his statement as cover for their votes against Alito.