To the editor:

The Senate Judiciary Committee recently approved the nomination of Justice Samuel Alito, with every Democrat voting against, which is the first nomination to lose every minority party vote in 90 years. Democratic opposition is based on Alito’s “extreme views on presidential authority.” Leahy, top Democrat on the committee, stated, “The president is in the midst of a radical realignment of the powers of the government and its intrusiveness into the private lives of Americans.”

Alito wrote that administration officials should have complete immunity if they break the law and spy on American citizens. He helped create the radical argument that the president can override Congress and dominate the courts by issuing a “signing statement” to “get in the last word” about what a new law means.

After 9-11, Bush claimed the power to indefinitely detain American citizens, without trial, formal charges or access to a lawyer. In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, the Supreme Court rejected his argument. Thomas dissented, basing his argument on the theory of the “unitary executive,” a theory Alito referred to as “gospel.” Alito even opposed Morrison v. Olson, which granted Congress power to create an independent counsel to investigate presidential scandals.

Vice President Gore asked, “If the president has the inherent authority to eavesdrop, imprison citizens on his own declaration, kidnap and torture, then what can’t he do?” Can he confiscate our property? Outlaw public elections? Continually declare pre-emptive war? Execute us for dissenting?

Confirming Alito could threaten the last real check against presidential abuse of power. Citizen support of dissenting legislators is needed before the final vote. Our democracy lies in the balance.