The 1985 Paradox
Judge Alito has been attempting to temper some pretty personal language he used in an interview form in 1985.
Now, it's possible that all of this is simply an attempt to dissuade senators from feeling the relevance of that previous position by Alito, and it is possible that his perception has changed since then. But it's also an interesting paradox that he's framed. Indeed, it is similar to the logical game where you write two statements on both sides of a single piece of paper: "The statement on the other side of this paper is True," says one side, while on the reverse it says "The statement on the other side of this paper is False."
The fact is, it puts both statements into an infinite loop of believability - one cannot accept either as factual because they it is simply too contradictory. Alito, by framing the discrepency into a world of "job seeking" while seeking a job, has achieved this very effect.
Why is this dangerous? Because he's a very smart guy. Perhaps he didn't see this as a consequence of concern, but everything like this is of great consequence when it comes to constitutional law. You see, I don't think it's a good thing for the stated opinion of any SCOTUS justice to move every case into inconsolable paradox. This is a bad idea.
And besides: it means that at some point in history Mr. Alito has lied to his interviewers. Either that time was then or that time is now. But which one is acceptable? It might be possible that he has fabricated his position every single time.
Great. I love this guy.
The Samuel Alito who argued against abortion rights in 1985 was "an advocate seeking a job" with the conservative Reagan administration, the Alito who is now a Supreme Court nominee told Democrats on Tuesday.The crux of this is obvious: what, exactly, Mr. Alito, makes your current situation any different in the very least? Aren't you now, simply yet again an advocate seeking a job? This is a concern that Sen. Ted Kennedy has been asking as well, following his meetings with Alito.
The current version "thinks he's a wiser person" with "a better grasp and understanding about constitutional rights and liberties," senators said as Alito tried to downplay a 20-year-old document in which he asserted "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion."
...
In that document, the younger Alito touted his anti-abortion work in the solicitor general's office, work "in which I personally believe very strongly."
Now, it's possible that all of this is simply an attempt to dissuade senators from feeling the relevance of that previous position by Alito, and it is possible that his perception has changed since then. But it's also an interesting paradox that he's framed. Indeed, it is similar to the logical game where you write two statements on both sides of a single piece of paper: "The statement on the other side of this paper is True," says one side, while on the reverse it says "The statement on the other side of this paper is False."
The fact is, it puts both statements into an infinite loop of believability - one cannot accept either as factual because they it is simply too contradictory. Alito, by framing the discrepency into a world of "job seeking" while seeking a job, has achieved this very effect.
Why is this dangerous? Because he's a very smart guy. Perhaps he didn't see this as a consequence of concern, but everything like this is of great consequence when it comes to constitutional law. You see, I don't think it's a good thing for the stated opinion of any SCOTUS justice to move every case into inconsolable paradox. This is a bad idea.
And besides: it means that at some point in history Mr. Alito has lied to his interviewers. Either that time was then or that time is now. But which one is acceptable? It might be possible that he has fabricated his position every single time.
Great. I love this guy.
posted by General Stan at 12:15 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home