Post from RBP's Blog:
News in Brief: Samuel Alito
Bad? Brilliant?
You can rate this post.
Register or login now and
tell us what you think.
Attended Princeton University and Yale Law

Demonstrated hostility toward a woman's right to choose

Problematic history with civil rights law

Argued that the government could not enact a ban on possession of machine guns

Dissented in 1991 in a 3rd Circuit decision striking down a Pennsylvania law's requirement that women tell their husbands before having an abortion.

Wrote a 1997 ruling that Jersey City officials did not violate the Constitution with a holiday display that included religious as well as secular symbols.

"Alito drew conflict-of-interest accusations after he upheld a lower court's dismissal of a lawsuit against the Vanguard Group. Alito had hundreds of thousands of dollars invested with the mutual fund company at the time. He denied doing anything improper but recused himself from further involvement in the case."

"A majority opinion in Fatin v. INS, 12 F.3d 1233 (3d Cir. 1993), holding that an Iranian woman seeking asylum could establish that she had a well founded fear of persecution in Iran if she could show that compliance with that country's "gender specific laws and repressive social norms," such as the requirement that women wear a veil in public, would be deeply abhorrent to her. Judge Alito also held that she could establish eligibility for asylum by showing that she would be persecuted because of gender, belief in feminism, or membership in a feminist group."

"A majority opinion in Shore Regional High School Board of Education v. P.S., 381 F.3d 194 (3d Cir. 2004), holding that a school district did not provide a high school student with a free and appropriate public education, as required by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, when it failed to protect the student from bullying by fellow students who taunted the student based on his lack of athleticism and his perceived sexual orientation."

"Perhaps Alito's most memorable dissent came in 1996 in Sheridan v. Dupont, a sex discrimination suit that forced the 3rd Circuit to tackle fundamental questions about the plaintiff's burden of proof. The issue in Sheridan was whether a plaintiff in a sex discrimination case can survive summary judgment simply by casting doubt on the employer's proffer of legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for the adverse employment decision…Alito, the lone dissenter, argued that his colleagues were going too far by allowing plaintiffs to get their case to a jury whenever they managed to cast any doubt on the employer's version."

US News Profile: Samuel Alito

Washington Post Profile: Samuel Alito

Law.com Profile: Samuel Alito

People for the American Way: Preliminary Report on Alito

 


Reader Comments
  
nice work
By jr Oct 31st 2005 at 1:11 pm EST
Really good research. Thanks for the crib sheet.
  
Wow, erm. where to start.
By edhula3 Oct 31st 2005 at 1:22 pm EST
First, I don't disagree with all of your points. Ergo, I will only discuss those I disagree with (a minority of them). (And I didn't mean for my title to sound so attacking...nor am I changing it. Too much work.)

First, it is almost impossible to take the constitution and then say there needs to be a ban on guns.
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed'
I *still* live in da south, and hear this far too often for my liking. (Consider it, the same way conservatives feel about Roe)

Wouldn't secular symbols (Santa Claus) and religious symbols (creche and menorah) show the greatest sign of tolerance as it displays many creeds coming together. And really, who is being offended here? Honestly. I don't want plattitudes. I want numbers, quotes, facts etc. from offended parties.

So what if he said the woman had to show obvious persecution for being a feminst in Iran. Alito is obviously ignorant because it is not hard to do so. Therefore, no real harm done...except for ignorance on the bench.

I am glad he recused himself of other cases (and if I remember correctly, he made a proper judgement by upholding the lower court's decision).

Finally, so now if you are "percieved to be gay" and can not play football you are disabled? When did this happen? And if not, why is Alito in the wrong.

Impressive activities btw.
Re: Wow, erm. where to start.
By RBP Oct 31st 2005 at 2:46 pm EST
My aim was not to promote my own opinion but to disseminate information about him and his decisions. You'll find no statements of opinion but provision of fact in my post--and, as you pointed out, the information included showed several different aspects of his judicial history rather than a simple set of negatives.

I merely provided a crib sheet, as jr (thank you) said.

Some of his decisions, as with the student persecuted for his sexuality and the Iranian woman seeking asylum, surprised me to the positive.
Re: Wow, erm. where to start.
By RBP Oct 31st 2005 at 2:49 pm EST
The last statement should be qualified, excuse me. Perhaps something like, I think that those two decisions in particular may be rather nuanced and before I form a concrete opinion on those two I'd like to read what he wrote. His opinions could go either way in those cases, either to reinforce fears or to mitigate them, but it'll take a read of what he said and how he reasoned.
Re: Wow, erm. where to start.
By edhula3 Oct 31st 2005 at 8:54 pm EST
mea culpa. mea culpa. *MY* opinion still stands. :)
  
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