Judging a justice

Confirm\nSo great was the Democrats' attempt to slander Samuel Alito during his hearings that one could have thought Alito had personally devoted his career to stealing wheelchairs from the disabled. But even this ad hominem strategy will not slow the growing influence of constitutional principle in the judiciary. One consequence of this principle concerns vital presidential powers, which many Democrats seek to shackle. \nTake the contentious issue of an executive prerogative, whereby the president holds inherent authority under the Constitution to act vigorously in times of war or emergency. In the leftist caricature, the only good conservative judges are "mainstream" (read: anti-federalist) ones who never vote to apply such constitutional standards to, say, the issue of wiretapping on unhung traitors. And then there are "radicals," such as Alito, who will.\nThese "radicals" -- such as Chief Justice Roberts and soon-to-be-Justice Alito -- mark the return of federalism. This fact upsets some Senate Democrats who rightly judge that the judiciary will soon be returned to its proper constitutional role. And, I hasten to add in this time of war, the federalists will maintain an "energetic executive," which will facilitate decision, activity, dispatch and yes, secrecy for the well-being of the republic.