A follow-up to my post yesterday: I’ve learned from Tony Mauro that CRS did some reports on then-Judge Alito’s cases in connection with his Supreme Court nomination. A quick Google search discloses at least three such reports—one on Alito’s abortion opinions, one on his “freedom of speech” opinions, and one on his environmental opinions. I don’t have time to review these reports to discern how “objective and nonpartisan” they are, though I do see that the summary of his environmental opinions, far from being merely descriptive, includes this assessment:

“a small number of his opinions arguably suggest endorsement of larger jurisprudential principles that may present hurdles to environmental plaintiffs (through narrow interpretation of a constitutional standing requirement), government enforcement (through stringent evidentiary requirements), and congressional legislating (through a narrow reading of the Commerce Clause).”

According to Mauro, a CRS spokeswoman says that “CRS ‘has a long history of supporting the Senate’s advice and consent role’ in judicial nominations with such research.” Whether that means that reports like those done on Sotomayor and Alito were done previously is unclear. (According to Wikipedia, “there is no accurate public list or catalog of CRS publications.”)