Alito Job Application

[Candyass]

I saw this on NPR's website...
http://www.npr.org/documents/2005/nov/alito/alitoabortion.pdf

Pay particular attention to pages 11 and 12 (his personal statement I beleive) where he states " I am particularly proud of my contributions in recent cases in which the government has argued in the Supreme Court that racial and ethnic quotas should not be allowed and that the Constitiution does not protect a right to an abortion."

I think his position on the constitution and abortion are quite clear.

Do you think this will keep him out?

[twentyshots]

given the events of the past couple of days where we have seen Republican dissent, i do wonder now how many who seek reelection will rock the boat too hard. It seems like a good time to be centrist. Will this reflect with Alito at all?

[markalot]

given the events of the past couple of days where we have seen Republican dissent, i do wonder now how many who seek reelection will rock the boat too hard. It seems like a good time to be centrist. Will this reflect with Alito at all?

No.

He has made it clear he personally oposes abortion. You can't oppose (maybe I should say fillibuster) someone just because you don't like their personal beliefs. The question is how he rules from the bench, which seems solid.

[miami2112]

goodbye roe v wade.

irony: the fact the fat white old men feel they can speak about women's reproductive and health rights.

did anyone see the frontline on abortion on pbs?? it showed how the "right" has chipped away at roe v wade and essentially made abortion not an option for various slices of american women. and the right wont stop until its entirely illegal.

[tinnitus]

Sadly the makeup of w's Supreme Court won't stop with overturning Roe v. Wade. They will rule in favor of pharmacists who do not want to dispense birth control or Plan B pills based on their religious belifes, they will favor abstinence education versus comprehensive sex ed, any and all gay rights will be curtailed, the separation of church and state will be blurred (hello ten commandments in every public building!), etc.

Welcome to the New United States of Alabama and all things Jesus!

[markalot]

goodbye roe v wade.

irony: the fact the fat white old men feel they can speak about women's reproductive and health rights.

did anyone see the frontline on abortion on pbs?? it showed how the "right" has chipped away at roe v wade and essentially made abortion not an option for various slices of american women. and the right wont stop until its entirely illegal.


I think we'll get to the point where abortion is only legal in the first month or so of pregnancy, and after that only for the health of the mother. It might be more liberal, OR it might be left up to the states to decide.

It should be no surprise that people who think abortion is murder are trying to restrict abortion rights. The abortion argument, however, has turned into the 20% on the far left arguing with the 20% on the far right. It's either ALL or nothing, which is stupid.

[tobedawg]

It's A LITTLE Late for liberals and progressives to start questioning the Bush Administration's Supreme Court nominee now.. Justice Alito is already in!!

Libs and Dems KNEW that the nomination of Harriet Miers was a farce and Bush would nominate somebody to replace O'Connor that would appease the Fundamentalists.. It's really pointless to stand up and fight and argue now.. He's In, the Supreme Court will change, and I hope that Roe V. Wade DOES get overturned so that liberals will wake the fuck up!

[Candyass]

The question is how he rules from the bench, which seems solid.

He specifically states in this personal statement that the Constitution does not protect the right to an abortion...this is what scares me, is this how he will rule on the bench?

[Megs79]

He specifically states in this personal statement that the Constitution does not protect the right to an abortion...this is what scares me, is this how he will rule on the bench?

He has since said, in talks with democrats, that he said this "as an advocate applying for a job." Which either means a) he won't try to overturn Roe v. Wade or b) he likes to tell people what they want to hear so he can get the job.

[Candyass]

He has since said, in talks with democrats, that he said this "as an advocate applying for a job." Which either means a) he won't try to overturn Roe v. Wade or b) he likes to tell people what they want to hear so he can get the job.

I agree with b)...and we all do this when trying to get a job. I guess I am curious to see what the confirmation process will do with this document. All in all, I just don't trust this guy with my personal liberties.

[Megs79]

I agree with b)...and we all do this when trying to get a job. I guess I am curious to see what the confirmation process will do with this document. All in all, I just don't trust this guy with my personal liberties.

I don't trust him either. I don't really think abortion is any man's decision. When a man can get pregnant, then they can weigh in on the topic.

[purple_octopus]

He specifically states in this personal statement that the Constitution does not protect the right to an abortion...this is what scares me, is this how he will rule on the bench?
Please show me where in the Consitution it states that abortion is a protected right. Alito commenting that it is not a protected right is not the same as saying he would rule against its legality. The Constitution also fails to define a fetus as a human being, and therefore fails to acknowledge life as a protected right for fetuses under the Constitution. If the Constitution actually said anything about the issue, it wouldn't be so debatable (from a legal standpoint, anyway). If you read the actual decision, it states that women have a Constitutionally protected right to privacy, and that the government cannot stand or fall on acceptance of the belief that life begins at conception (a belief which has been nowhere near proven). The ruling argues that it is only through her right to privacy that a woman is entitled to terminate a pregnancy.

They also go on to state:
On the basis of elements such as these, appellant and some amici argue that the woman's right is absolute and that she is entitled to terminate her pregnancy at whatever time, in whatever way, and for whatever reason she alone chooses. With this we do not agree. Appellant's arguments that Texas either has no valid interest at all in regulating the abortion decision, or no interest strong enough to support any limitation upon the woman's sole determination, are unpersuasive. The Court's decisions recognizing a right of privacy also acknowledge that some state regulation in areas protected by that right is appropriate. As noted above, a State may properly assert important interests in safeguarding health, in maintaining medical standards, and in protecting potential life. At some point in pregnancy, these respective interests become sufficiently compelling to sustain regulation of the factors that govern the abortion decision. The privacy right involved, therefore, cannot be said to be absolute. In fact, it is not clear to us that the claim asserted by some amici that one has an unlimited right to do with one's body as one pleases bears a close relationship to the right of privacy previously articulated in the Court's decisions. The Court has refused to recognize an unlimited right of this kind in the past. Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905) (vaccination); Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927) (sterilization).

We, therefore, conclude that the right of personal privacy includes the abortion decision, but that this right is not unqualified and must be considered against important state interests in regulation.

Bear in mind that I do not think abortion should be made illegal (until such time as science can prove when life begins, which will be never). However, the "constitutionally protected right" argument is weak. I swear politicians use the abortion issue to distract all of us lemmings from the meat of current events.

[miami2112]

Bear in mind that I do not think abortion should be made illegal (until such time as science can prove when life begins, which will be never). However, the "constitutionally protected right" argument is weak. I swear politicians use the abortion issue to distract all of us lemmings from the meat of current events.


hmmmm, kinda like gay marriage last election???

[purple_octopus]

hmmmm, kinda like gay marriage last election???
Precisely.