Alito Has a 'Libertarian Bent'--???

Politics & Elections
1

Wikipedia has an interesting article on SCOTUS associate justice Sam Alito. (I would include a link. But the SDMB doesn’t let me cut and paste from my smartphone, even though I can do it everywhere else.)

Anyway, he obviously is a stalwart original intent judge. That doesn’t surprise me. But it also says that he has a ‘Libertarian bent’.

I am a little confused. On specifically what issues does he have a libertarian bent? And what does that even mean?

I know Wikipedia is not always the best source for information. But they are clearly alluding to something here.

Thank you for your kindly replies:).

:):):slight_smile:

2

I can’t possibly discern what exactly the author of that statement meant, but I take it to mean that his rulings tend to err on the side of personal liberty as opposed to state authority.

3

Here is the wiki on Alito.

I see no mention of the word “bent”, nor do I see it claim he is libertarian. The closest from that page is this:

4

I’ll believe that the first time I see him overrule a law restricting something like gay rights or marijuana use or abortions.

Alito may be one of those libertarians who thinks corporations shouldn’t be regulated but has no problem with regulating people.

5

I think he might actually be the least libertarian of the right-wing justices. Has he ever seen a search he thought was illegal?

6

I don’t know much about Alito, I’m just speculating as to what someone might mean by describing a judge as having a “libertarian bent”.

7

It often seems to me that every libertarian has their own definition of what libertarianism means. So it’s hard to know what the person who wrote that meant.

8

It’s not uncommon for Libertarians to point to the 1800s as an era when the US was much more free than now, even though slavery was legal for more than half of it and Jim Crow was in effect for the second half. When you delve into it, it turns out that they are considering only federal government action as infringing freedom, and mostly don’t consider state government action a problem, and especially don’t consider ‘private individuals protected by state force doing things that are technically illegal but never being prosecuted for it’ at all. When you can contort the meaning of words that much, you can fit just about any judge who’s ruled against some level of the government consistently to have a ‘libertarian bent’.

9

I honestly thought that was where I read that (“Libertarian bent”). But I can’t cut and paste from my smartphone on this site. So there would be little point in me researching the matter further (maybe someone else could add something useful:)).

The article did say a couple of interesting things. He said he is a "practical originalist ". What does “practical” mean? Also he doesn’t always vote with the conservatives (it says).

Plus as someone pointed out, libertarian could mean anything. “Get government off our backs” could mean let corporations do as they please. And freedom could mean let the states do as they please. :slight_smile:

10

How true.