Community Blogs Login | Search Blogs
Post from August Pollak's Blog:
Alito's support for privacy & gay rights?
By August J. Pollak - Nov 2nd, 2005 at 2:26 pm EST
Also listed in: Campus Progress Blog | AlitoBlog
Comments |  Mail to a Friend
Bad? Brilliant?
You can rate this post.
Register or login now and
tell us what you think.
There's been some discussion growing about Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito's writings in college regarding possible support for privacy and gay rights. Check out the Boston Globe's article here, and discussion from AmericaBlog and TalkLeft.

Or, better yet, read the actual report, which Campus Progress has available in full as a PDF.

Reader Comments
  
Sounds to me...
Reply
By Superduperficial Nov 2nd 2005 at 2:31 pm EST
Like..

1) All things considered, Alito ain't a half-bad judge, and not a bad guy. Though certainly I would have wanted someone less right-wing if possible.

2) Alito is as good as confirmed.


The job now is to get out more stories like this so progressives aren't too up in arms when he isn't filibustered, so we don't lose steam for '06.
Re: Sounds to me...
Reply
By tdale Nov 2nd 2005 at 2:53 pm EST
I agree that's he's likely as good as confirmed and that our sights must be steady on 2006, but note that Alito has received many a rebuke for his disregard for precedent...thus, Roe and other privacy matters could suffer the same fate...
Re: Sounds to me...
Reply
By tdale Nov 2nd 2005 at 2:53 pm EST
I agree that's he's likely as good as confirmed and that our sights must be steady on 2006, but note that Alito has received many a rebuke for his disregard for precedent...thus, Roe and other privacy matters could suffer the same fate...
Re: Sounds to me...
Reply
By Superduperficial Nov 2nd 2005 at 5:39 pm EST
Depends who sets the precedent, what type of precedent it is, etcetera.

As said before, my focus is on the process by which he reaches decisions, not necessarily what the result is.
The source of my concern
Reply
By jr Nov 2nd 2005 at 7:33 pm EST
...is that he knows the standards to apply when judging the appellate law (such as applying the "undue burden" test in Casey), but his application is skewed too far right to be acceptable in a jurist. I just can't imagine someone who cannot judge appropriately whether or not a standard is met being responsible for writing new standards for all to follow in perpetuity for the next 20+ years.

If we must go down, let it be swinging.
  
nsfcb gfhdpb
Reply
By ijfuacb zbesmh Jul 11th 2008 at 8:36 am EDT
mibkeqyg dblyvon jiqv tiqfsx kgnxpziuh gimqwa pdqxo
  
nsfcb gfhdpb
Reply
By ijfuacb zbesmh Jul 11th 2008 at 8:37 am EDT
mibkeqyg dblyvon jiqv tiqfsx kgnxpziuh gimqwa pdqxo
  
ljgkxcnt eisgh
Reply
By hvsyzl irgzacw Jul 11th 2008 at 8:38 am EDT
isvwaz tgixmv buryqmgl ehqb xlhmb ecbgimq nquamd
  
kxejodqlf njxmpitvq
Reply
By zejdp vldao Jul 11th 2008 at 8:41 am EDT
gkevwj bjkw iujfptwsv xchdwtro idgx ujrfwqhs efdrzaq
  
Campus Progress

Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.
Campus Progress