Is Alito More Gay Positive Than Believed?

[William769]

(Washington) New documents have emerged showing Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito may be more liberal and gay positive than he has been perceived.

In a report prepared by a Princeton University undergraduate task force, chaired by Alito while he was a student, recommended the decriminalization of sodomy, said that discrimination against gays in hiring ''should be forbidden," and accused the CIA and the FBI of invading the privacy of citizens.

''We sense a great threat to privacy in modern America," Alito wrote in a foreword to the report, in 1971. ''We all believe that privacy is too often sacrificed to other values; we all believe that the threat to privacy is steadily and rapidly mounting; we all believe that action must be taken on many fronts now to preserve privacy."

The report was obtained from the Seeley G. Mudd Manuscript Library by the Boston Globe. It was issued by Alito and16 other Princeton students in 1971.

http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/11/110205gaysAlito.htm

ON EDIT: I am not trying to defend this man. I am confused on what is going on here. I hope to learn alot more in the very near future.

[Jack_Dawson]

1. He seems like a nice man

[Ravenseye]

2. Funny how the privacy talk goes out the window

when they start talking about women's reproductive privacy...

[Bloodblister Bob]

3. No surprise that Alito may be gay-positive...

...considering all the closeted self-loathing gays in the Bush administration.

[kweerwolf]

4. Geez! Didn't you see "Star Wars"?

while he was a student

That was obviously before young Alito was seduced by the Dark Side of the Force.

[lavenderdiva]

5. maybe he just supports married gays?

seems like he wants to give rights to married men, not women. I read an article here on DU this morning, that Alito's views hinge a lot on whether you are married or not. Just wondering... (ps. with a lot of sarcasm added in)

[bee]

6. well, he was in 1971. 34 years ago. n/t

[kweerwolf]

7. There's an article on this in today's Boston Globe

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/11/02/alito_writing_backed_privacy_gay_rights/

The report, issued in 1971 by Alito and 16 other Princeton students, stemmed from a class assignment to study the ''boundaries of privacy in American society" and to recommend ways to protect individual rights.

The far-ranging report, which satisfied a requirement for public policy students and which was stored in the university's Seeley G. Mudd Manuscript Library, provided a glimpse of a more liberal Alito than the jurist is now perceived.

<snip>

A classmate, Jeffrey G. Weil, said yesterday that Alito, one of the top seniors in his class, had been selected to advise juniors writing the report, coaching them through the research and then writing an introduction explaining their recommendations.

Alito was ''not a person who has an agenda in terms of changing the world," said Weil, who is now a lawyer in Philadelphia. His role was mostly advisory, said Weil, who wrote the section of the report dealing with gay rights but who said he could not remember whether Alito personally agreed with the recommendations.

..............................

I think there's a HUGE difference between what someone writes as a law school assignment (especially during the relatively liberal early '70s) and how one rules from the bench when he no longer has professors to satisfy.

Personally, I think speculation about whether Alito is gay-friendly (or at least isn't "let's-burn-the-fags-at-the-stake-like-God-wants"-gay-UNfriendly) is irrelevant. He's had three decades to soak up the rhetoric of the conservative movement and let it seep into his rulings.

[closeupready]

8. Gays seem to fall within those he considers worthy of privacy protection

at least, to me. I think he's probably not a threat.

[foreigncorrespondent]

9. Maybe...

...he was a good leftie back then? :shrug:

[TaleWgnDg]

10. Take it from an old law school grad . . . things that a law school

.
Take it from an old law school grad . . . things that a law school student authors may be meaningless to r/l law practice or any indication as to political leanings. You see, law school students are taught to argue any side of a legal controversy. One must be able to do so in order to take the eventual bar exam to be licensed to practice law. Thus, such a law school task may merely hone the student's talents for future eventualities, not demonstrate anything personal.

My take on Alito so far is that he is farther to the right than is Scalia. And he will be the fifth member of the Roman Catholic Church to be seated on the present U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) if his nomination gets confirmed in the Senate. Other members of the Catholic faith on SCOTUS now are:

Antonin Scalia (uber-conservative aka radical conservative)
Clarence Thomas (uber-uber-conservative aka radical radical conservative)
Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. (conservative but don't know, as yet, how far right)
Anthony M. Kennedy (NPR, All Things Considered, 3/4/04, RealPlayer® audio, 12:26 minutes) (conservative but somewhat moderate-conservative at times)

If Alito, also known as "Scalito" since he is in the same ballpark of legal theories as is Justice Scalia, is seated on SCOTUS then we are in for a trip down the legal pathway to many years of uber-conservative rulings that will set this country's legal clock back to late 1800s to early 1900s when corporations were untouched by the courts, a very weak federal government, and individual rights hardly if at all existed.

Scary stuff.



.

[JudyM]

13. Why does he seem farther to the right than Scalia to you?

Frightening thought. I've been hoping Ginsberg could soften him up and that once on the bench he'd see how ludicrous Scalia and Thomas are. (Dreamer, I know)

[TaleWgnDg]

14. What caused me to make that legal conclusion? Two things.

.
What caused me to make that legal conclusion? Two things.

First, George Walker Bush's express and continuous articulations -- no, promises to nominate "only judges in the same (vein) as Scalia and Thomas," then understanding what he means conforms with George Walker Bush's politics and that of the uber-conservative Republican Party. A weak decentralized federal government so that corporations can do whatever the hell they want to do without individual rights (the Bill of Rights) or congress impeding them, and a rise of states capacity to govern as they did prior to the Civil War (w/o intrusion of a large central (federal) government).

Second, Judge Alito's written opinions; however, I've read only a few but enough to demonstrate his judicial theory ("philosophy") which I'd say is "originalism," "textualism." George W. Bush calls it "strict constructionism" which is not a precise term and which Scalia has many times expressly disavowed as being. These opinions indicate that Alito is farther to the right than is Scalia but not as off-the-wall as Justice Clarence Thomas who should never have been seated on SCOTUS because his opinions are way the hell out of mainstream America.

In other words, Alito is a rightwing radical who is farther right than is Scalia.

______________________
edited to add: BTW, are you aware that SCOTUS u/ Chief Justice William H. Renhquist at the helm (the Renhquist Court), was the most "activist" U.S. Supreme Court since the inception of the U.S. Supreme Court? Yes, it may be said (using rightwing language) that the Rehnquist Court "legislated from the bench" when it over-turned (tossed out) more federal laws than any other SCOTUS in the history of SCOTUS. Well. Think about another radical joining the Court! Alito. This is what the "neo-cons" want, unfettered power to do whatever the hell they want to do. Congress (the people) be damned. What better way to achieve that end than to set into effect a federal court system that will uphold their radicalism? This goal has been kicked around since "neo-con" (radical) Ronald Reagan first proposed it, or more correctly those around him idealized about it and set it into motion.
.

[JudyM]

15. I agree with your point re: activism (e.g., Bush v Gore, '00) but from

the parts of his opinions I've read, he seems a bit more reasonable than Scalia (would Alito be as likely to write that Bible-thumping hateful concurrence in Bowers v Hardwick as Scalia did?) At least in his expression, from what I've seen he appears more moderate. Might also be some measure of wishful thinking involved on my part, too ;-) Time will tell...

[Solo_in_MD]

11. I kind of agree

What is trickling out in the media seems to build a picture of a judge who follows the law, even if he is conservative. Still waiting to see a more complete picture but those who produced a knee jerk response may be looking a bit foolish over time.

I am going to wait an see before take a position on him.

[closeupready]

12. Yes, that's prudent.

Wait and see. The possibilities are frightening.