Samuel Alito
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
Incumbent
Assumed office January 31, 2006
Appointed by	George W. Bush
Preceded by	Sandra Day O'Connor
Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
In office April 30, 1990 – January 31, 2006
Appointed by	George H. W. Bush
Preceded by	John Gibbons
Succeeded by	Joseph Greenaway
United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey
In office December 28, 1987 – April 30, 1990
Nominated by	Ronald Reagan
Preceded by	Thomas Grenlish
Succeeded by	Michael Chertoff
Personal details
Born	Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. (1950-04-01) April 1, 1950 (age 62) Trenton, New Jersey, U.S.
Spouse(s)	Martha Bomgardner
Alma mater	Princeton University Yale University
Military service
Service/branch	United States Army
Years of service	1972–1980
Rank	Captain
Unit	Army Reserve Signal Corps

Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. (pronounced /əˈliːtoʊ/; born April 1, 1950) is an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He was nominated by President George W. Bush and has served on the court since January 31, 2006.^[1]

Raised in Hamilton Township, New Jersey and educated at Princeton University and Yale Law School, Alito served as U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey and a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit prior to joining the Supreme Court. He is the 110th justice, the second Italian American and the eleventh Roman Catholic to serve on the court. Alito has been described by the Cato Institute as a conservative jurist with a libertarian streak.^[2]

Early life and education[link]

Alito was born in Trenton, New Jersey, to Italian American parents: Italian immigrant Samuel A. Alito, Sr., and the former Rose Fradusco.^[3][4] Alito's father, now deceased, was a high school teacher and then became the first Director of the New Jersey Office of Legislative Services, a position he held from 1952 to 1984. Alito's mother is a retired schoolteacher.

Alito grew up in Hamilton Township, New Jersey, a suburb of Trenton.^[5] He attended Steinert High School in Hamilton Township^[6] and graduated from Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs with a Bachelor of Arts in 1972 before attending Yale Law School, where he served as editor on the Yale Law Journal and earned a Juris Doctor in 1975.

At Princeton, Alito led a student conference in 1971 called "The Boundaries of Privacy in American Society" which, among other things, supported curbs on domestic intelligence gathering, called for the decriminalization of sodomy, and urged for an end to discrimination against gays in hiring by employers.^[7] He also led the American Whig-Cliosophic Society's Debate Panel during his time at Princeton.^[8]

While a sophomore at Princeton, Alito received the low lottery number 32, in a Selective Service drawing on December 1, 1969.^[9] In 1970, he became a member of the school's Army ROTC program, attending a six-week basic training camp that year at Fort Knox, Kentucky, in lieu of having been in ROTC during his first two years in college. Alito was a member of the Concerned Alumni of Princeton, which was formed in October 1972 at least in part to oppose Princeton's decisions regarding affirmative action. Apart from Alito's written 1985 statement of membership of CAP on a job application, which Alito says was truthful, there is no other documentation of Alito's involvement with or contributions in the group. Alito has cited the banning and subsequent treatment of ROTC by the university as his reason for belonging to CAP.

During his senior year at Princeton, Alito moved out of New Jersey for the first time to study in Italy, where he wrote his thesis on the Italian legal system.^[10] Graduating in 1972, Alito left a sign of his lofty aspirations in his yearbook, which said that he hoped to "eventually warm a seat on the Supreme Court."^[11]

He was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the U.S. Army Signal Corps after his graduation from Princeton and assigned to the United States Army Reserve. Following his graduation from Yale Law School, he served on active duty from September to December 1975. The remainder of his time in the Army was served in the inactive Reserves. He was a Captain when he received an honorable discharge in 1980.^[9]

Early legal career[link]

After graduating from Yale Law School in 1975, where he was an editor of the Yale Law Journal,^[12] Alito clerked for Third Circuit appeals judge Leonard I. Garth in Newark, New Jersey in 1976 and 1977.^[10] He interviewed with Supreme Court Justice Byron White for a clerkship but was not hired.^[13] Between 1977 and 1981 Alito was Assistant United States Attorney, District of New Jersey. While serving as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, he prosecuted many cases that involved drug trafficking and organized crime.^[14]

From 1981 to 1985 Alito was Assistant to Solicitor General Rex E. Lee. Alito argued 12 cases before the Supreme Court for the federal government during his tenure as assistant to the Solicitor General. From 1985 to 1987 Alito was Deputy Assistant to Attorney General Edwin Meese. In his 1985 application for Deputy Assistant to the Attorney General, Alito espoused conservative views, naming William F. Buckley, Jr., the National Review, Alexander Bickel, and Barry Goldwater's 1964 presidential campaign as major influences. He also expressed concern about Warren Court decisions in the areas of criminal procedure, the Establishment Clause, and reapportionment.^[15] From 1987 to 1990 Alito was United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey.

Court of Appeals judge[link]

Nomination and confirmation[link]

Alito was nominated by President George H. W. Bush on February 20, 1990 to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, to a seat vacated by John Joseph Gibbons. Alito was rated by the American Bar Association as "Well Qualified" at the time of his nomination. He was confirmed by unanimous consent in the Senate on April 27, 1990,^[16] and received his commission three days later. As a Third Circuit judge, his chambers were in Newark, New Jersey.^[10]

Notable opinions[link]

Federalism

• A dissenting opinion in United States v. Rybar, 103 F.3d 273 (3d Cir. 1996), arguing that a U.S. law banning private citizens from owning submachine guns was similar to one struck down by the Supreme Court in United States v. Lopez and thus outside the authority of Congress under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
• A majority opinion in Chittister v. Department of Community & Economic Development, 226 F.3d 223 (3d Cir. 2000). This case concerned an employee's claim of wrongful termination under the Family and Medical Leave Act against the state of Pennsylvania. States are free to maintain sovereign immunity under the U.S. Constitution. Since Pennsylvania had maintained its immunity to such suits, Alito affirmed the lower court's dismissal of the employee’s claims.

First Amendment

• A majority opinion in Saxe v. State College Area School District, 240 F.3d 200 (3d Cir. 2001), holding that a public school district's anti-harassment policy was unconstitutionally overbroad and therefore violated First Amendment guarantees of free speech.
• A majority opinion in ACLU v. Schundler, 168 F.3d 92 (3d Cir. 1999), holding that a government-sponsored holiday display consisting solely of religious symbols was impermissible, but that a mixed display including both secular and religious symbols was permissible if balanced in a generally secular context.
• A dissenting opinion in C. H. v. Oliva et al. (3d Cir. 2000), arguing that the removal and subsequent replacement in "a less conspicuous spot" of a kindergartener's religious themed poster was, at least potentially, a violation of his right to free expression.
• A dissenting opinion in Snyder v. Phelps (2011), arguing that protesting at funerals was infringing on the rights of the grieving.

Fourth and Eighth Amendments

• A dissenting opinion in Doe v. Groody, arguing that qualified immunity should have protected police officers from a finding of having violated constitutional rights when they strip-searched a mother and her ten-year-old daughter while carrying out a search warrant that authorized the search of a residence.
• A unanimous opinion in Chadwick v. Janecka (3d Cir. 2002), holding that there was "no federal constitutional bar" to the "indefinite confinement" of a man imprisoned for civil contempt because he claimed he could not pay his $2.5 million debt to his wife.

Civil rights

• A majority opinion in Williams v. Price, 343 F.3d 223 (3d Cir. 2003), granting a writ of habeas corpus to a black state prisoner after state courts had refused to consider the testimony of a witness who stated that a juror had uttered derogatory remarks about blacks during an encounter in the courthouse after the conclusion of the trial.^[17]
• A dissenting opinion in Glass v. Philadelphia Electric Company, 34 F.3d 188 (3rd Cir. 1994), arguing that a lower court did not abuse its discretion in excluding certain evidence of past conduct that defendant had created a hostile and racist work environment.
• A majority opinion in Robinson v. City of Pittsburgh, 120 F.3d 1286 (3rd Cir. 1997), rejecting a female police officer's Equal Protection-based sexual harassment and retaliation claims against the city and certain police officials and rejecting her Title VII-based retaliation claim against the city, but allowing her Title VII-based sexual harassment claim against the city.

Other activities[link]

Since 1985, Alito has been married to Martha-Ann Alito (born Martha-Ann Bomgardner), once a law librarian who met Alito due to his many trips to the library as a legal clerk;^[10] she has family roots in Oklahoma. They have two college-age children: Philip and Laura. Alito resided with his family in West Caldwell, New Jersey before his Supreme Court nomination.^[18] He has since moved to a home in Washington D.C..

As adjunct professor at Seton Hall University School of Law in Newark from 1999 to 2004, Alito taught courses in constitutional law and an original course on terrorism and civil liberties. In 1995, Judge Alito was presented with that law school's Saint Thomas More Medal, "in recognition of his outstanding contributions to the field of law."^{[citation needed]} On May 25, 2007, he delivered the commencement address at Seton Hall Law's commencement ceremony and received an honorary law degree from the law school.^[19][20]

He has been a member of the Federalist Society, a group of conservatives and libertarian lawyers and legal students interested in conservative legal theory.^[21]

As a visiting professor at Duke University School of Law, Alito will teach Current Issues in Constitutional Interpretation in fall 2011 and a course in the Master of Laws in Judicial Studies program in summer 2012.^[22]

Nomination to U.S. Supreme Court and confirmation hearings[link]

With President George W. Bush looking on, Samuel Alito acknowledges his nomination.

On July 1, 2005, Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement from the Supreme Court effective upon the confirmation of a successor. President George W. Bush first nominated John Roberts to the vacancy; however, when Chief Justice William Rehnquist died on September 3, Bush withdrew Roberts' nomination to fill O'Connor's seat and instead nominated Roberts to the Chief Justiceship. On October 3, President Bush nominated Harriet Miers to replace O'Connor. However, Miers withdrew her acceptance of the nomination on October 27 after encountering widespread opposition.

On October 31, President Bush announced that he was nominating Alito to O'Connor's seat, and he submitted the nomination to the Senate on November 10, 2005.^[23] Judge Alito was unanimously rated "well qualified" to fill the Associate Justice post by the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary, which measures the professional qualifications of a nominee. The committee rates judges as "not qualified," "qualified," or "well qualified."^[24]

Alito's confirmation hearing was held from January 9 to January 13, 2006. On January 24, his nomination was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on a 10–8 party line vote. Democratic Senators characterized Alito as a hard right conservative in the mold of a Clarence Thomas or Robert Bork. Alito professed reluctance to commit to any type of ideology, stating he would act as an impartial referee. On the abortion issue, he stated that he would look at that with an open mind but would not state how he would rule on Roe v. Wade if that issue were to come up before the court. Some pro-life activists, however, claim Alito's confirmation as a victory for their cause.^[25]

Democrats on the committee grilled Alito on his past association with the conservative group Concerned Alumni of Princeton.^[26] Alito stated that he had listed an affiliation with the group on his application to Ronald Reagan's Justice Department in order to establish his conservative credentials: "You have to look at the question that I was responding to and the form that I was filling out... I was applying for a position in the Reagan administration. And my answers were truthful statements, but what I was trying to outline were the things that were relevant to obtaining a political position."^[27] During the confirmation hearings, Alito disavowed the group, whose views were criticized as racist and sexist, saying: "I disavow them. I deplore them. They represent things that I have always stood against and I can't express too strongly."^[27] During Alito's Senate confirmation hearings, his wife, Martha Ann Alito, broke into tears after Republicans expressed their disapproval of how Alito was being characterized by some Democrats on the panel.^[28]

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) formally opposed Alito's nomination. The ACLU has only taken this step two other times in its entire history, the last time being with the nomination of Robert Bork who was rejected by a 58–42 vote in the Senate.^[29] In releasing its report^[30] on Alito, ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero justified the decision saying that "At a time when our president has claimed unprecedented authority to spy on Americans and jail terrorism suspects indefinitely, America needs a Supreme Court justice who will uphold our precious civil liberties. Judge Alito's record shows a willingness to support government actions that abridge individual freedoms."^[31]

Debate on the nomination began in the full Senate on January 25. After a failed filibuster attempt by Senator John Kerry, on January 31, the Senate confirmed Alito to the Supreme Court by a vote of 58–42,^[32] with four Democratic senators voting for confirmation and one Republican and an Independent voting against. Alito's confirmation vote was the second lowest on the current court, where he is surpassed only by Clarence Thomas who was confirmed 52-48. Alito became the 110th justice, the second Italian American,^[33][34] and the 11th Catholic in the history of the Supreme Court, and the fifth Catholic on the Court at the time he assumed office.^[35]

U.S. Supreme Court career[link]

Because Alito joined the court mid-term, he had not heard arguments for many cases which had yet to be decided. The decisions in most of those cases were released without his participation (i.e., with an 8-member Court); none were 4–4, so Alito would not have been the deciding vote in any of them if he had participated. Three cases – Garcetti v. Ceballos, Hudson v. Michigan, and Kansas v. Marsh – were reargued, since a tie needed to be broken.

Alito delivered his first written opinion on May 1, 2006 in the case Holmes v. South Carolina, a case involving the right of criminal defendants to present evidence that a third party committed the crime. (Since the beginning of the Rehnquist Court, new justices have been given unanimous opinions to write as their first majority court opinion, often done as a courtesy "breaking in" of new justices, so that every justice has at least one unanimous, uncontroversial opinion under his/her belt). Alito wrote for a unanimous court in ordering a new trial for Bobby Lee Holmes due to South Carolina's rule that barred such evidence based on the strength of the prosecution's case, rather than on the relevance and strength of the defense evidence itself. His other majority opinions in his first term were in Zedner v. United States, Woodford v. Ngo, and Arlington Central School District Board of Education v. Murphy.

Alito ceremonially sworn in by Chief Justice John Roberts the day after his confirmation, February 1, 2006.

In his first term, Alito voted fairly conservatively. For example, in the three reargued cases (Garcetti v. Ceballos, Hudson v. Michigan and Kansas v. Marsh), Alito created a 5–4 majority by voting with four other conservative Justices – Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas. He further voted with the conservative wing of the court on Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon^[36] and Rapanos v. United States. Alito was also a dissenter in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, alongside Justices Scalia and Thomas.

While Alito's voting record is conservative, he does not always join the most conservative Justices on the Court. On February 1, 2006, in Alito's first decision sitting on the Supreme Court, he voted with the majority (6–3) to refuse Missouri's request to vacate the stay of execution issued by the Eighth Circuit for death-row inmate Michael Taylor; Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia and Thomas were in favor of vacating the stay. Missouri had twice asked the justices to lift the stay and permit the execution.^[37]

On the abortion issue, it appears that Alito believes some restrictions on the procedure are constitutionally permitted, but has not signaled a willingness to overturn Roe v. Wade.

In 2003, Congress passed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which led to a lawsuit in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart. The Court had previously ruled in Stenberg v. Carhart that a state's ban on partial birth abortion was unconstitutional because such a ban did not have an exception in the case of a threat to the health of the mother. The membership of the Court changed after Stenberg, with John Roberts and Samuel Alito replacing William Rehnquist (a dissenter in Roe) and Sandra Day O'Connor (a supporter of Roe) respectively. Further, the ban at issue in Gonzales v. Carhart was a federal statute, rather than a state statute as in the Stenberg case.

On April 18, 2007, the Supreme Court handed down a decision ruling constitutional the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the five-justice majority that Congress was within its power to generally ban the procedure, although the Court left open the door for as-applied challenges. Kennedy, writing for the court, implied but did not absolutely reach the question whether the Court's prior decisions in Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and Stenberg v. Carhart were valid, and instead the Court said that the challenged statute is consistent with those prior decisions whether or not those prior decisions were valid.

Alito joined fully in the majority as did Chief Justice Roberts. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion, joined by Justice Scalia, contending that the Court's prior decisions in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey should be reversed, and also noting that the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act may exceed the powers of Congress under the Commerce Clause. Alito, Roberts, and Kennedy did not join that assertion. Justices Ginsburg, Souter, Breyer, and Stevens dissented, contending that the ruling ignored Supreme Court abortion precedent.

Moreover, despite having been at one time nicknamed "Scalito," Alito's views have differed from those of Scalia (and Thomas), as in the Michael Taylor case cited above and various other cases of the 2005 term. Scalia, a fierce critic of reliance on legislative history in statutory interpretation, was the only member of the Court in Zedner v. United States not to join a section of Alito's opinion that discussed the legislative history of the statute in question. In two higher-profile cases, involving the constitutionality of political gerrymandering and campaign finance reform (LULAC v. Perry and Randall v. Sorrell), Alito adopted narrow positions, declining to join the bolder positions advanced by either philosophical side of the Court. According to a scotusblog.com analysis of 2005 term decisions, Alito and Scalia concurred in the result of 86% of decisions (in which both participated), and concurred in full in only 75%.^[38]

In the 2007 landmark free speech case Morse v. Frederick, Alito joined Roberts' majority decision that speech advocating drug use can be banned in public schools, but also warned that the ruling must be circumscribed that it does not interfere with political speech, such as the discussion of the medical marijuana debate.

Alito's majority opinion in the 2008 worker protection case Gomez-Perez v. Potter cleared the way for federal workers who experience retaliation after filing age discrimination complaints to sue for damages. He sided with the liberal bloc of the court, inferring protection against retaliation in the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act despite the lack of an explicit provision concerning retaliation.

Related documents[link]

• Legal Memo written while working in the United States Solicitor General's office regarding the Fleeing felon rule. (May 18, 1984) (PDF)
• 'Personal Qualifications Statement' when applying to be an Assistant Attorney General under Pres. Ronald Reagan. (November 15, 1985)
• Legal Memo written as Deputy Asst. Attorney General to the OMB’s General Counsel regarding OMB authority of FDIC funds. (1986) (PDF)
• House Committee on the Judiciary testimony regarding unpublished court opinions. (1990) (PDF)
• 2003 Financial Disclosure
• 2004 Financial Disclosure
• Response to a Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire (November 30, 2005) (PDF), (Appendix1 Appendix2 Appendix3 Appendix4)

See also[link]

conservatism portal

References[link]

Further sources[link]

• Bazelon, Emily (October 31, 2005). "Alito v. O'Connor". Slate.
• "Bush choice sets up court battle". BBC.
• Collins, Ronald K.L. (October 31, 2005). Judge Alito: fairly strong on free expression.
• Collins, Ronald K.L. (November 3, 2005). Alito as government lawyer: '84 broadcast-regulation case.
• Davis, Elliott M. (Summer 2007). The Newer Textualism: Justice Alito's Statutory Interpretation. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy
• Dickerson, John (October 31, 2005). "Ready To Rumble". Slate.
• Federal Judicial Center. Judges of the United States (official curriculum vitae).
• Hook, Janet (November 1, 2005). "Bush's Supreme Court Nominee: A Phillies Fan With Blue-Chip Legal Stats." Los Angeles Times. P. A1.

External links[link]

Find more about Samuel Alito on Wikipedia's sister projects:
	Definitions and translations from Wiktionary
	Images and media from Commons
	Learning resources from Wikiversity
	News stories from Wikinews
	Quotations from Wikiquote
	Source texts from Wikisource
	Textbooks from Wikibooks

• Supreme Court official site with biographies
• Profile at the Biographical Directory of Federal Judges, a public domain publication of the Federal Judicial Center
• Legal resources at the Law Library of Congress
• Biography and writings at the Legal Information Institute
• Profile at the Oyez Project
• Appearances on C-SPAN
• Profile at the Internet Movie Database
• Financial information at OpenSecrets.org
• Collected news and commentary at The New York Times
• Works by or about Samuel Alito in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
• Profile at Notable Names Database
• Fox, John, Capitalism and Conflict, Biographies of the Robes, Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. Public Broadcasting Service.
• Washington Post Profile
• Daily Princetonian profile
• Profile at SourceWatch
• "The Record of Samuel Alito: A Preliminary Review". People For the American Way. 2005.
• Read Congressional Research Service (CRS) Reports regarding Alito
• Alito
• National Archives Alito links
• The White House Judicial Nominations page on Alito

Supreme Court of the United States
The Roberts Court Chief Justice: John Glover Roberts, Jr. (2005–present) 2006–2009: J.P. Stevens A. Scalia A. Kennedy D. Souter C. Thomas R.B. Ginsburg S. Breyer S. Alito 2009–2010: J.P. Stevens A. Scalia A. Kennedy C. Thomas R.B. Ginsburg S. Breyer S. Alito S. Sotomayor 2010–present: A. Scalia A. Kennedy C. Thomas R.B. Ginsburg S. Breyer S. Alito S. Sotomayor E. Kagan

Samuel
Infant Samuel by Joshua Reynolds 1723
Prophet, Seer
Honored in	Judaism Christianity Islam
Major shrine	Tomb of Samuel, Jerusalem

Samuel ( /ˈsæm.juː.əl/;^[1] Hebrew: שְׁמוּאֶל, Modern Shmu'el Tiberian Šəmûʼēl; Greek: Σαμουήλ Samouēl; Latin: Samvel; صموئيل, Ṣamu’īl; Strong's: Shemuwel) is a leader of ancient Israel in the Books of Samuel in the Hebrew Bible. He is also known as a prophet and is mentioned in the Qur'an.^[2]

His status, as viewed by rabbinical literature, is that he was the last of the Hebrew Judges and the first of the major prophets who began to prophesy inside the Land of Israel. He was thus at the cusp between two eras. According to the text of the Books of Samuel, he also anointed the first two kings of the Kingdom of Israel: Saul and David.

Biblical account[link]

Gerbrand van den Eeckhout - Hannah presenting her son Samuel to the priest Eli ca.1665

Family[link]

Samuel's mother was Hannah and his father was Elkanah. Hannah, at the beginning of the narrative, is barren and childless, like Abraham's wife Sarah. Hannah prays to God for a child. Eli who is sitting at the foot of the doorpost in the sanctuary at Shiloh, sees her apparently mumbling and thinks Hannah is drunk, but is soon assured of her motivation and sobriety. Eli was, according to the Books of Samuel, the name of a priest of Shiloh, and one of the last Israelite Judges before the rule of kings in ancient Israel. He blesses her after she promises the child to God. Subsequently Hannah becomes pregnant; her child is Samuel. After he is weaned, she leaves him in Eli's care.

Elkanah is Samuel's father and lives at Ramah (1 Sam. 1:19; 2:11; comp. 28:3), in the district of Zuph. His genealogy is also found in a pedigree of the Kohathites (1 Chron. 6:3-15) and in that of Heman, his great-grandson (ib. vi. 18-22). According to the genealogical tables, Elkanah was, a Levite, a fact otherwise not mentioned in the books of Samuel. The fact that Elkanah, a Levite, was denominated an Ephraimite is analogous to the designation of a Levite belonging to Judah (Judges 17:7, for example).^[3]

Name[link]

According to 1 Samuel 1:20, Hannah named Samuel in memory of her requesting a child from God and God listening. Samuel is translated as Heard of God or possibly as a sentence "God has heard" (from 'Shama', heard and 'El', God — with "Shama" as the verb and "El" as the subject).^[4] Samuel in the Hebrew root word is "sha’al" which is mentioned seven times in 1 Samuel 1 and once as "sha’ul" (1:28), which is Saul’s name in Hebrew. Coogan suggests that Saul’s birth narrative was transferred to Samuel by the Deuteronomistic Historians.^[5]

Calling[link]

One night, around the age of 13, Samuel heard a voice calling his name. According to the Jewish historian Josephus, Samuel was about 12 years old.^[6] He initially assumed it was coming from Eli and went to Eli to ask what he wished to say. Eli, however, sent Samuel back to sleep. After this happened three times Eli realized that the voice was God's, and instructed Samuel on how to respond. Once Samuel responded God told him that the wickedness of the sons of Eli had resulted in their dynasty being condemned to destruction. Eli asked Samuel to honestly recount to him what he had been told, and upon receiving the communication merely said that God should do what seems right to himself.

Leader[link]

During Samuel's youth at Shiloh the Philistines inflicted a decisive defeat against the Israelites at Eben-Ezer (1 Sam. 4:1,2), placed the land under Philistine oppression, and took the sanctuary's Ark for themselves. (Some modern textual scholars consider that the Song of Moses, believed to be originally distinct from the surrounding text of Deuteronomy and not written by Moses, may in reality have been written in response to the theological implications of this disastrous defeat, possibly by Samuel himself.)^{[citation needed]}

This was decades before the Israelites began to be ruled by a king. After 20 years of such oppression, Samuel, who had gained national prominence as a prophet, summoned the people to Mizpah (one of the highest hills in the land), where he organized them into an army, and led them against the Philistines. The Philistines, having marched to Mizpah to attack the newly amassed Israelite army, were soundly defeated and fled in terror. The retreating Philistines were slaughtered by the Israelites, which the Bible portrays positively. The text then states that Samuel erected a large stone at the battle site as a memorial, and there ensued a long period of peace thereafter.

Textual criticism[link]

National prophet, local seer[link]

Some authors see the biblical Samuel as combining descriptions of two distinct roles:

• A seer, based at Ramah, and seemingly known scarcely beyond the immediate neighbourhood of Ramah (Saul, for example, not having heard of him, with his servant informing him of his existence instead). In this role, Samuel is associated with the bands of musical ecstatic roaming prophets (shouters - neb'im) at Gibeah, Bethel, and Gilgal, and some traditional scholars have argued that Samuel was the founder of these groups. At Ramah, Samuel secretly anoints Saul, after having met him for the first time, while Saul was looking for his father's lost donkeys, and treated him to a meal.
• A prophet, based at Shiloh, who went throughout the land, from place to place, with unwearied zeal, reproving, rebuking, and exhorting the people to repentance. In this role, Samuel acted as a (biblical) judge, publicly advising the nation, and also giving private advice to individuals. Eventually Samuel delegates this role to his sons, based at Beersheba, but they behave corruptly and so the people, facing invasion from the Ammonites, persuade Samuel to appoint a king. Samuel reluctantly does so, and anoints Saul in front of the entire nation, who had gathered to see him.

Textual scholars suggest that these two roles come from different sources, which later were spliced together to form the Book(s) of Samuel. The oldest is considered to be that which marks Samuel as the local seer of Ramah, who willingly anoints Saul as King in secret, while the latter is that which presents Samuel as a national figure, who begrudgingly anoints Saul as King in front of a national assembly. This later source is generally known as the republican source, since here, and elsewhere, it denigrates the actions and role of the monarchy (particularly those of Saul) and favours religious figures, in contrast to the other main source – the monarchial source – which treats the monarchy favourably. Theoretically if we had the monarchial source we would see Saul appointed king by public acclamation, due to his military victories, and not by cleromancy involving Samuel. Another difference between the sources is that the republican source treats the shouters as somewhat independent from Samuel (1 Samuel 9) rather than having been led by him (1 Samuel 19:18ff). The passage (1 Samuel 7:15-16) in which Samuel is described as having exercised the functions of a (biblical) judge, during an annual circuit from Ramah to Bethel to Gilgal (the Gilgal between Ebal and Gerizim) to Mizpah and back to Ramah, is thought by textual scholars to be a redaction aimed at harmonizing the two portrayals of Samuel.^[7]

The Book(s) of Samuel variously describe Samuel as having carried out sacrifices at sanctuaries, and having constructed and sanctified altars. According to the Mitzvot only Aaronic priests and/or Levites (depending on the Mitzvah) were permitted to perform these actions, and simply being a nazarite or prophet was insufficient. The books of Samuel and Kings offer numerous examples where this rule is not followed by kings and prophets, but some textual scholars look elsewhere seeking a harmonization of the issues. In the Book of Chronicles, Samuel is described as a Levite, rectifying this situation; however textual scholars widely see the Book of Chronicles as an attempt to redact the Book(s) of Samuel and of Kings to conform to later religious sensibilities. Since many of the Mitzvot themselves are thought to postdate the Book(s) of Samuel (according to the documentary hypothesis), Chronicles is probably making its claim based on religious bias. The Levitical genealogy of 1 Chronicles 4 is not historical, according to modern scholarship.^[7]

The Deuteronomistic Historians' Portrait of Samuel[link]

The Deuteronomistic Historians, who redacted the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, 1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings), idealized Samuel as a figure who is larger than life like Joshua. Samuel is a priest even though he is not of the tribe of Levi from his childhood. Samuel is a judge who leads the military like in the Book of Judges and also who exercises judicial functions. In 1 Sam 12:6-17, the Deuteronomic Historians composed a speech of Samuel that puts him as the judge sent by God to save Israel.^[8] In 1 Samuel 9:6-20, Samuel is seen as a local “seer.” The Deuteronomistic Historians preserved this view of Samuel while contributing him as “the first of prophets to articulate the failure of Israel to live up to its covenant with God.” ^[8] For the Deuteronomistic Historians, Samuel was extension of Moses and continuing Moses’ function as a prophet, judge, and a priest which made historical Samuel uncertain.^[8]

Samuel's retirement and death[link]

Apparition of the spirit of Samuel to Saul, by Salvator Rosa, 1668.

Samuel initially appointed his two sons as his successors; however, the Israelites rejected them and insisted on having a king rule over them. Samuel, who is opposed to a king, warns them of the potential negative consequences of such a decision, but at the people's insistence, asks God for a king. Samuel is told to seek out Saul, an animal herder said to be a head taller than his peers, and anoint him as the first King of Israel.

Just before his retirement, Samuel gathered the people to an assembly at Gilgal, and gives them a farewell speech, in which he emphasised how prophets and judges were more important than kings, how kings should be held to account, and how the people should not fall into idol worship, or worship of Asherah or of Baal; Samuel threatened that God would subject the people to foreign invaders should they disobey. This is seen by some people as a deuteronomic redaction;^[7] being that archaeologically sees that Asherah was still worshipped in Israelite households well into the 6th century. However, the Bible is clear in 1 Kings 11:5, 33, and 2 Kings 23:13 that the Israelites fell into Asherah worship later on.^[9]

Samuel then went into retirement, though he reappears briefly in the two accounts of why Saul's dynasty lost divine favour (parts of 1 Samuel 13 and 15), essentially acting, according to scholars, as the narrator's mouthpiece.^{[citation needed]} Apart from being the individual who anoints David as king, a role Samuel is abruptly summoned to take, he does not appear any further in the text until his own death at his hometown Ramah (1 Samuel 25:1, 28:3), where he is buried (cf. 2 Kings 21:18, 2 Chronicles 33:20, and John 19:41). According to classical rabbinical sources, this was at the age of fifty-two.

Samuel's death, however, is not completely the end of his appearance in the narrative. In the passage concerning Saul's visit to the Witch of Endor, ascribed by textual scholars to the republican source, Samuel was temporarily raised from the dead so that he can tell Saul his future. Many Christian interpretations of this event portray Samuel's appearance as being a deception from Satan, or even a demon in disguise. There are other interpretations which say that Saul and the witch having been frightened by his appearance, and Samuel as having been composed, classical rabbinical sources argue that Samuel was terrified by the ordeal, having expected to be appearing to face God's judgement, and had therefore brought Moses with him (to the land of the living) as a witness to his adherence to the mitzvot.^[7]

Perspectives on Samuel[link]

Judaism[link]

According to the Book of Jeremiah, and one of the Psalms (99), Samuel had a high devotion to God. Classical Rabbinical literature adds that he was more than an equal to Moses, God speaking directly to Samuel, rather than Samuel having to attend the tabernacle to hear God.^[10] Samuel is also described by the Rabbis as having been extremely intelligent; he argued that it was legitimate for laymen to slaughter sacrifices, since the Halakha only insisted that the priests bring the blood (cf Leviticus 1:5, Zebahim 32a).^[11] Eli, who was viewed negatively by many Classical Rabbis, is said to have reacted to this logic of Samuel by arguing that it was technically true, but Samuel should be put to death for making legal statements while Eli (his mentor) was present.^[11]

Samuel is also treated by the Classical Rabbis as a much more sympathetic character than he appears at face value in the Bible; his annual circuit is explained as being due to his wish to spare people the task of having to journey to him; Samuel is said to have been very rich, taking his entire household with him on the circuit so that he didn't need to impose himself on anyone's hospitality; when Saul fell out of God's favour, Samuel is described as having grieved copiously and having prematurely aged.^[12]

Christianity[link]

For Evangelical Christians Samuel is considered to be a Prophet, Judge, and wise Leader of Israel, and treated as an example of fulfilled commitments to God. On the Eastern Orthodox liturgical calendar, his feast day is August 20. He is commemorated as one of the Holy Forefathers in the Calendar of Saints of the Armenian Apostolic Church on July 30. In the Coptic Orthodox Church, the commemoration of the departure of Samuel the Prophet is celebrated on 9 Paoni.

Islam[link]

Mosque of the Prophet Samuel, Jerusalem

Tomb of the Prophet Samuel, Jerusalem

Samuel is also a revered prophet^[13] and seer in the Islamic faith. The narrative of Samuel in Muslim literature focuses specifically on his birth and the anointing of Saul. Other elements from his narrative are in accordance with the narratives of other prophets of Israel, as exegesis recounts Samuel's preaching against idolatry. Although he is mentioned in the Qur'an, his name is not given but he is instead referred to as "a Prophet".^[14] According to Islamic history, the Israelites, after the time of the prophet Moses, wanted a king to rule over their country. Thus, God sent the prophet Samuel to anoint Saul as the first king for the Israelites. The Qur'an states:

Have you thought of the elders of Israel after Moses, and how they said to their apostle: "Set up a king for us, then we shall fight in the way of God?" He replied: "This too is possible that when commanded to fight you may not fight at all." They said: "How is it we should not fight in the way of God when we have been driven from our homes and deprived of our Sons?" But when they were ordered to fight they turned away, except for a few; yet God knows the sinners.

—Qur'an, sura 2 (Al-Baqara), ayah 246^[14]

The Qur'an goes on to state that a king was anointed by the prophet, whose name was Talut (Saul in the Hebrew Bible). However, it states that the Israelites mocked and reviled the newly appointed king, as he was not wealthy from birth. But, in sharp contrast to the Hebrew Bible, the Qur'an praises Saul greatly, and mentions that he was gifted with great spiritual and physical strength. In the Qur'anic account, Samuel prophesies to the children of Israel, telling them that the sign of Saul's kingship will be that the Ark of the Covenant will come back to the Israelites:

And when their prophet said to them: "God has raised Saul king over you," they said: "How can he be king over us when we have greater right to kingship than he, for he does not even possess abundant wealth?" "God has chosen him in preference to you," said the prophet "and gifted him abundantly in wisdom and stature; and God gives authority to whomsoever He will: God is infinite and all-wise."
Their prophet said to them: "The sign of his kingship will be that you will come to have a chest (tabu't) full of peace and tranquility (Sakina) from your Lord and remainder of the legacy of the children of Moses and the children of Aaron, carried over by the angels. In this certainly shall be a sign for you if you really believe."

—Qur'an, sura 2 (Al-Baqara), ayah 247–248^[15]

See also[link]

• Biblical judges
• Books of Samuel
• Book of Samuel the Seer
• List of names referring to El
• Midrash Samuel
• Tomb of Samuel

References[link]

• This article incorporates text from Easton's Bible Dictionary (1897), a publication now in the public domain.

David Pakman
File:Headshot-2009-10-08-4.jpg David Pakman in October 2009
Born	(1984-02-02) February 2, 1984 (age 28) Buenos Aires, Argentina
Residence	Northampton, Massachusetts
Alma mater	University of Massachusetts Bentley University

David Pakman (born February 2, 1984 in Buenos Aires, Argentina) is a radio and television host, best known as the host of the nationally syndicated political talk radio and TV program "The David Pakman Show".

Early life[link]

Pakman was born in Buenos Aires, Argentina.^[1]

Education[link]

Pakman received a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Massachusetts Amherst in Amherst, Massachusetts, double-majoring in economics and communication in 2006. In 2009, he graduated with an MBA from Bentley University in Waltham, Massachusetts.^[1]

The David Pakman Show[link]

The David Pakman Show is a radio, internet, and television talk show hosted by David Pakman, currently airing on over 100 radio and television stations, DirecTV and DISH Network through Free Speech TV, YouTube, and via internet podcast. The program first aired in August 2005 on WXOJ-LP ("Valley Free Radio"), located in Northampton, Massachusetts, as "Midweek Politics with David Pakman", and has since been nationally syndicated. Midweek Politics is a political talk program, focusing on the politics and news of the week, with regular interviews of both liberal, conservative, and non-political guests. As a weekly show, it airs throughout the week on both radio and television affiliates around the US and across the world.

References[link]

This article about a United States journalist born in the 1980s is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. v t e

Virginia Lamp Thomas
Virginia Thomas at her husband's swearing in as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court
Born	Virginia Lamp (1957-02-23) February 23, 1957 (age 55) United States
Residence	Virginia
Other names	Ginni
Alma mater	Creighton University, B.A. Creighton University School of Law, J.D.
Occupation	Attorney, public policy analyst, political activist, lobbyist
Employer	Heritage Foundation Liberty Central
Political party	Republican
Religion	Episcopalian
Spouse	Clarence Thomas

Virginia "Ginni" Lamp Thomas (born February 23, 1957) is an American attorney who is the founder and president of the conservative advocacy group Liberty Central; and the head of Liberty Consulting, Inc. Thomas previously worked at The Heritage Foundation. She is the wife of U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas.

Early life and education[link]

Thomas grew up in Omaha, Nebraska, the youngest of four children born to Donald Lamp, a successful engineer who owned his own firm, and Marjorie Lamp, a stay-at-home mother.^[1][2][3] Her parents were described by The Washington Post as "upper middle class Republican Party insiders who stressed family and religion at home" and who wintered in Florida.^[2]

Thomas attended Westside High School in Omaha, where she was a member of the student government, the debate club, and the Republican club.^[2] While she was still in high school, her ambition was to be a member of Congress.^[3] She enrolled in a woman's college in Virginia because of its proximity to Washington, D.C., subsequently transferred to the University of Nebraska, and then to Creighton University to be closer to a boyfriend.^[3] She received a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and Business Communication from Creighton University (1979) and a Juris Doctor from Creighton University School of Law (1983), after a hiatus working as a Legislative Aide for Congressman Hal Daub.^[2][3][4]

Career[link]

1981–1991[link]

When Congressman Daub took office in 1981, Thomas moved to Washington, D.C., and worked in his office for 18 months.^[1][2][3] After completing Creighton University School of Law (1983), she worked one more year for Daub in Washington as his Legislative Director.^[3] From 1985 to 1989, she was employed as an attorney and labor relations specialist at the United States Chamber of Commerce,^[2][5][6] attending congressional hearings where she lobbied on behalf of the interests of the business community.^[2] Her advocacy included arguing against the passage of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which requires larger employers to provide temporary unpaid leave to employees to care for a new child or during a serious personal or family illness.^[7] In 1989, she became Manager of Employee Relations at the Chamber of Commerce.^[8]

1991–2009[link]

In 1991, Thomas returned to government service in the Legislative Affairs Office of the United States Department of Labor,^[9][10][11] where she argued against comparable-worth legislation that would have mandated equal pay for women and men in jobs deemed to be comparable.^[12][13] That year, her husband, Clarence Thomas was nominated by President George H. W. Bush to fill the open seat on the U.S. Supreme Court left by the retirement of Justice Thurgood Marshall.^[14] She attended the contentious Senate confirmation hearings and stood by her husband as he was accused of sexual harassment.^[15] During the confirmation hearings, several Democratic Senators claimed that her job with the Labor Department might create a conflict of interest for her husband if he was seated on the Supreme Court.^[16] After her husband was narrowly confirmed by a majority vote of 52 to 48,^[17] Mrs. Thomas described the televised scrutiny and confirmation process as a "trial by fire".^[18][19] Her next job was as a Policy Analyst for Congressman Dick Armey, who was then the Republican House Conference Chairman.

In 1994, conflict-of-interest was raised again while Thomas was working for Armey.^[20][21] By 2000, she was working for the Heritage Foundation; and conflict-of-interest was again raised because she was collecting résumés for potential Presidential appointments in the George W. Bush Administration when the Supreme Court was deciding Bush v. Gore.^[22][23] She continued to work at the Heritage Foundation during the administration of George W. Bush, serving as the think tank's White House Liaison.^[24] She serves on the Alumni Advisory Board of her alma mater, Creighton University School of Law.^[4]

2009–present[link]

In late 2009, Thomas started a nonprofit lobbying group, Liberty Central, to organize conservative activists, issue score cards for Congress members, and be involved in elections.^[25] The group is aimed at opposing what Thomas has called the leftist "tyranny" of President Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats and "protecting the core founding principles" of the nation.^[26] Thomas was interviewed by Sean Hannity on his Fox News show Hannity in June 2010. When asked about potential conflicts between her Liberty Central activities and her husband's position, Thomas replied, "there's a lot of judicial wives and husbands out there causing trouble. I'm just one of many."^[27]

In February 2011, Politico reported that Thomas was the head of a new company, Liberty Consulting, Inc., which filed incorporation papers in mid-November 2010. The company's website states that clients can use Thomas's "experience and connections" to help "with "governmental affairs efforts" and political donation strategies.^[28]

Critic of Lifespring[link]

In the 1980s, while a congressional aide, Thomas took training with the self-awareness program Lifespring.^[29] In 1987, she related to The Washington Post that, during her training several years earlier, she had been "confused and troubled" by lessons such as one where trainees were told to disrobe to bikinis and bathing suits then "made fun of fat people's bodies and riddled one another with sexual questions".^[29] After realizing that membership in her Lifespring group was separating her from her family, friends, and co-workers, Thomas began what proved to be a difficult and months-long process of breaking away.^[29] At one point, she hid in another part of the U.S. to avoid a constant barrage of high-pressure phone calls from Lifespring members, who felt they had a duty to keep her in the organization.^{[2][29][30][31]}

Thomas ultimately came to believe that Lifespring was a cult.^[2] After leaving the group in 1985, she sought counseling and joined the Cult Awareness Network.^[2][32] She became a critic of controversial religious groups, speaking on panels and organizing workshops critical of cults for Congressional staffers in 1986 and 1988.^[2] In a 1991 interview, Thomas remarked, "I was once in a group that used mind control techniques"; and she called its members "pretty scary people."^[33]

Personal life[link]

Virginia and Clarence Thomas married in 1987.^[34] They live in Virginia.^[35]

Multiple news organizations reported that, on October 9, 2010, Virginia Thomas left a voicemail message for Anita Hill, whose accusations of sexual harassment complicated her husband's Senate confirmation hearing 19 years earlier.^[36][37] In the voice mail, Thomas said that Hill should apologize to Thomas's husband. Hill responded that she believed there was nothing to apologize for and said that her 1991 testimony about her interactions with Clarence Thomas was truthful.^[36]