In this Findlaw column, I questioned what Judge Alito meant in his 1985 Reagan Administration job application when he stated: “In college, I developed a deep interest in constitutional law, motivated in large part by disagreement with Warren Court decisions, particularly in the areas of criminal procedure, the Establishment Clause and reapportionment [of voting districts].”
Judge Alito has given his first answer today, in response to a question from Sen. Kohl. Here is an excerpt from the Washington Post‘s Campaign for the Court blog post on the topic:

The principle of “one man, one vote” is a fundamental principle of constitutional law, Alito said.
“I don’t see any reason why it should be reexamined…..I never was opposed to the one-person one-vote concept.”
So what was it that concerned him, asked Kohl.
He said his father, then working for the New Jersey legislature, had brought to his attention the question of “how exactly equal districts had to be.” It seemed that the Supreme Court, at one point, was saying they had to be exactly equal and “that would have wiped out” some of the New Jersey re-mapping.
But one-man, one vote, “that’s very well settled,” said Alito.