Samuel Alito and the Vanguard problem

Editor and Publisher reports here on a story in the Boston Globe about Samuel Alito and his relationship with Vanguard mutual funds.

It seems that Sammy promised during his confirmation hearings in 1990 to recuse himself from any cases involving Vanguard, due to his large holdings of Vanguard mutual fund shares. Yet, in 2002 he presided over a case involving Vanguard anyway.

After Alito ruled in Vanguard's favor, he complained about the plaintiff's efforts to vacate his decision and remove him from the case, saying: ''I do not believe that I am required to disqualify myself based on my ownership of the mutual fund shares."

If anyone, especially a federal judge, can be that blatant about breaking a promise and then lying about it, they certainly are not qualified to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court.

If you ask me, Sammy has broken both the 3rd and the 9th Commandments. James Dobson, where are you when we need you?

What's really interesting is that the Bush spin machine is conveniently ignoring Alito's promise, and is focusing only on the conflict of interest charges. Their position is that Sammy's $400,000 investment with Vanguard was just petty cash, and there is no way that he would have ruled for Vanguard just to protect his own financial interests.

Remember, it's Sammy's lies and lack of integrity that are at issue here, not the money. Don't get sucked in!