MSM Lawyer working for Alito?

[marykmusic]

I find this very suspicious and think the game's afoot:<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em> New Clerk for Alito Has a Long Paper Trail <br> By Adam Liptak <br> The New York Times <br><br> Sunday 19 February 2006 <br><br> Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., who was so bland and self-effacing at his Supreme Court confirmation hearings last month, made a bold decision on arriving at the court. He hired Adam G. Ciongoli, a former top aide to Attorney General John Ashcroft and an architect of the Bush administration's legal strategy after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, to be one of his law clerks. <br><br> In the world of clerkdom, Mr. Ciongoli's appointment was a startling development, both because of his seniority and because of his political background. While his paper trail might attract critics eager to see potential conflicts of interest, his substantial professional experience, rare among clerks, may also be a big asset. <br><br> "We don't normally contemplate a high-level Justice Department official becoming a Supreme Court clerk," said Ronald D. Rotunda, a specialist in legal ethics at George Mason University School of Law. "It's just asking for problems that are unnecessary." Most Supreme Court law clerks, who prepare memorandums and draft decisions for the justices, have little of note on their résumés beyond superior grades at a top law school and a clerkship with a federal appeals court judge. <br><br> "They're like legal Doogie Howsers - child prodigies of the law," said David Lat, a former federal prosecutor whose blog "Underneath Their Robes" reports on the hiring of Supreme Court clerks. "Yet they're influencing decisions that affect millions." <br><br> Mr. Ciongoli, 37, represents a different model. He has a rich and public history in government and, most recently, as a senior lawyer at Time Warner. <br><br> "It really indicates a lapse in judgment," Deborah L. Rhode, who teaches legal ethics at Stanford, said of Justice Alito's decision. "I just don't think it helps your reputation for nonpartisanship, particularly after such partisan confirmation hearings, to start out by hiring someone who is perceived to have an ideological agenda."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <br><br>The rest is at www.truthout.org --MaryK <p></p><i></i>

[CyberChrist]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>"It really indicates a lapse in judgment," Deborah L. Rhode, who teaches legal ethics at Stanford, said of Justice Alito's decision. "I just don't think it helps your reputation for nonpartisanship, particularly after such partisan confirmation hearings, to start out by hiring someone who is perceived to have an ideological agenda."<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>The whole problem is that there was <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>never</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> any doubt that Scalito was non-partisan. He's a right-wing fanatic and his membership to various right-wing organizations were well-documented.<br><br>So, I would say that he never had a repututation for non-partisanship. <p></p><i></i>