It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: Supreme Court Nominee, Alito, Rejected Abortion as Constitutional Right

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 12:13 PM
link   
In a 1985 document obtained by the Washington Times, Supreme Court Nominee, Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr., indicated that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion." In what is certain to become a political firestorm, supporters and opponents alike are already mobilizing efforts to discount or amplify the relevance of Alito's 1985 statements. One Republican official involved in the nomination process is quoted as saying, ""The issue is not Judge Alito's political views during the Reagan administration 20 years ago. It's his 15 years of jurisprudence, which can be evaluated in hundreds of opinions. And in none of those opinions is it evident what his political philosophy is."
 



www.washtimes.com
Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr., President Bush's Supreme Court nominee, wrote that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion" in a 1985 document obtained by The Washington Times.

"I personally believe very strongly" in this legal position, Mr. Alito wrote on his application to become deputy assistant to Attorney General Edwin I. Meese III.

The document, which is likely to inflame liberals who oppose Judge Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court, is among many that the White House will release today from the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.

In direct, unambiguous language, the young career lawyer who served as assistant to Solicitor General Rex E. Lee, demonstrated his conservative bona fides as he sought to become a political appointee in the Reagan administration.

"I am and always have been a conservative," he wrote in an attachment to the noncareer appointment form that he sent to the Presidential Personnel Office. "I am a lifelong registered Republican."

But his statements against abortion and affirmative action might cause him headaches from Democrats and liberals as he prepares for confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, scheduled for January.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Prepare for the political battle of the year! It is somewhat surprising that Republicans were so quick to offload Harriet Miers- a far less papered candidate and just as likely to hold the same position as Alito. Now that Democrats have something solid to point to concerning Alito's stance on abortion, the circus fight between the two camps will certainly begin.

[edit on 14-11-2005 by loam]




posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   
A recent Gallup Poll indicates that most Americans favor Alito's Appointment.




Closer to Roberts than to Miers in popularity

The American public generally supports President George W. Bush's third nominee to replace Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. By a 2-to-1 margin, 50% to 25%, Americans say the Senate should vote to confirm Judge Samuel Alito. Another 25% of Americans have no opinion about his confirmation -- not atypical for public attitudes about Supreme Court nominees.





It will be interesting to see how quickly these numbers move. That will serve as the best indication of how important abortion rights are the American public.



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   
The Constitution doesn't protect the right to abortion. It protects the right to privacy. I find it interesting that we don't see his quote in context.

Like Democrats and Republicans need more to argue about!



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Benevolent Heretic
It protects the right to privacy.


Actually, it doesn't expressly do that either. Justice Harry Blackmun based his Roe v. Wade decision in part on a "penumbra" of rights cast by the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments, as well as the concept of liberty guaranteed in the Fourteenth Amendment. The word "privacy" never appears in the Constitution.



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Loam - I know that. Don't argue with me!




The Court in Roe chose, however, to base its decision on the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the so-called "right of privacy" protected in earlier decisions such as Griswold v Connecticut

Constitutional Conflict



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Benevolent Heretic:

I never attempt to argue with you...
You generally have enough sense for 10 people.



[edit on 14-11-2005 by loam]



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 05:12 PM
link   





Alito backs away from memo

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A member of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Tuesday that Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito had distanced himself from a memo he wrote 20 years ago that said "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the only female member of the committee that will vote on the nomination, said she asked the appeals court judge about the memo.

"What [Alito] said was, 'It was different then. I was an advocate seeking a job. It was a political job,'" the California Democrat said.

She said Alito said 1985 was a "very different" time, when he was an advocate for the Reagan administration. As a judge for 15 years, he looks at legal matters differently.

"I don't give heed to my personal views. What I do is I interpret the law,'" she said, quoting the 55-year-old judge from New Jersey.

Feinstein said she believed Alito was sincere.

She said they discussed Roe v. Wade, the landmark case that legalized abortion, and that Alito said he had been through "many reviews" of the case but did not say he accepted it as legal precedent.



Interesting...

Thoughts?



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Interesting loam.

"What [Alito] said was, 'It was different then. I was an advocate seeking a job. It was a political job,'" the California Democrat said.

She said Alito said 1985 was a "very different" time, when he was an advocate for the Reagan administration. As a judge for 15 years, he looks at legal matters differently.

[emphasis mine]

Though I, personally, don't see Alito as much more than a Meir-ish figure with a paper trail ... it's per his paper trail that causes my wonder:

? Is this a roundabout way of declaring his stance may have changed over the years?

An out to supporters once/if he is approved ?

Hmmm ... one does have to wonder?!


[edit on 11/15/2005 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Well, this guy puzzles me. Personally, I am suspicious of his intent, but that's mostly because of my judgments of Bush. I suspect Bush would love to do something spectacular to be remembered by and to put a 'positive' spin on his term... Is there an attempt to overturn Roe v Wade on the agenda?

I don't trust Alito. Although I do understand how the statement (in context) could have been appropriate. I sure hope they grill him and get an idea of his intent.

The fiasco that would ensue if the SC tried to overturn Roe v Wade would be something to see!

So, there are my thoughts. As jumbled as they are.



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 05:45 PM
link   
In looking back over how Alito has actually ruled on the abortion issue, he has heard three cases. Twice he voted "Pro Choice" and once he voted "Pro Life"-- that last case was on very late term abortions.



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 06:09 PM
link   
... and now for the conspirital view ...

Was Meirs simply a sacrificial proposal, who is now back to regular duties, while the real appointee slides through with relatively few "bumps"?

All the while ... the kicker being ... Is Alito Skulls and Bones?!

Alito = Yale
GW Bush = Yale
Skull and Bones = Yale

? put the icing on the cake and light the candles ?

? continuation of the cause ?

Peace2All
p.s. presenting possibilities

[edit on 11/15/2005 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Nov, 16 2005 @ 12:04 AM
link   

"What [Alito] said was, 'It was different then. I was an advocate seeking a job. It was a political job,"


It was a political job, so its ok to pander to whoever he's trying to get to give him the job.

It just seems to me that that is how that paragraph would continue.



posted on Nov, 16 2005 @ 02:46 AM
link   
Bush will try to get remembered and I will laugh so hard cause he will mess up. Like he always does.




top topics



 
1

log in

join