LAT/AP: WH: Alito Is Mainstream Jurist (AP has copy of 600-pg briefing bk)

[DeepModem Mom]

White House: Alito Is Mainstream Jurist
By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent


WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito's opinions on abortion, discrimination and other contentious issues are the work of a mainstream jurist, not the ideologue depicted by critics, the White House argues in a voluminous briefing book meant for Republican senators.

Alito's dissent in a 1991 abortion ruling showed "concern for the safety of women," the material says. By approving a requirement for spousal notification, he "reflected the position advanced by the Democratic governor of Pennsylvania."

A 1996 dissent in a sex discrimination case in which Alito sided with the employer shows he "simply questioned the wisdom of a 'blanket rule'" on dismissing such complaints before trial, in the White House view....

***

The White House compilation systematically lays out anticipated criticism of Alito on abortion, free speech, civil rights, religious liberties and other topics, then counters them in language that senators or other supporters might use in public. The bulk of the material is made up of legal citations.

Administration aides distributed their research to senior Republican aides on the Judiciary Committee in a White House meeting within hours of Alito's appointment on Oct. 31....(AP)obtained a copy of the "Judge Samuel A. Alito Briefing Binder," which runs roughly 600 pages....


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wire/ats-ap_top12nov05,0,7792358,full.story

[Kagemusha]

1. I was just reading a Slate article on the spousal notification.

3 paras for your attention:

Now, I'm seeing two arguments there. One is that the woman has some kind of misperception about her marriage or her situation, and her husband can set her straight. And the other argument is that the husband has such a profound interest in keeping the fetus alive—and his wife has such a small interest in controlling what happens to her body—that the government can force her to consult him even if she's so afraid of him, or so certain she can't have this baby, that she won't talk to him unless we threaten her with criminal charges. And you implied that Justice O'Connor, the justice you're planning to replace on this court, would agree with you.

In point of fact, you were wrong about that, weren't you, Judge? I mean, we have the actual answer to that question, because Justice O'Connor, along with Justices Kennedy and Souter, wrote the Supreme Court's controlling opinion in Casey a year after you issued your dissent. And she pretty flatly rebuked you, didn't she? She says the spousal notice provision "is an undue burden, and therefore invalid." Couldn't be any plainer. And in the very next sentence, she addresses those parental notification cases you cited, and here's what she says:

Those enactments, and our judgment that they are constitutional, are based on the quite reasonable assumption that minors will benefit from consultation with their parents and that children will often not realize that their parents have their best interests at heart. We cannot adopt a parallel assumption about adult women.

(from http://www.slate.com/id/2129321/nav/tap2/
"Right to Wife - Why does Judge Alito treat women like girls?"

[wmills551]

2. I think a husband has a right to be notified!

I think there are circumstances where this should not be the rule, but there are special circumstances for every law. Same goes for minors, except a parent should sign a consent, not just a notification. Makes sense to me. A minor can't have plastic surgery or a tattoo without consent. Just have provisions in the law for special circumstances. It is the right thing to do. Democrats need to use a little common sense on this issue.

[RaRa]

4. I guess I'm too rigid

I don't believe ANYONE has the right to FORCE a woman to have a baby. Same as no one has the right to force an abortion.

[wmills551]

7. You are too rigid

Notification does not mean a husband gives consent.

[RaRa]

9. In some marriages it can mean the same thing. n/t

[wmills551]

10. It is the husband's child also.

[shanti]

13. so what?

he's not carrying it for 9 months! do you have any idea what would happen if an abused wife HAD to inform her husband of a potential abortion??

[wmills551]

19. to the husband, the wifer or the it?

[RaRa]

20. Exactly, so what!

If a wife wants an abortion, and she's not telling the husband, that means she has a reason. Maybe simply that he wouldn't want her to. So? Why should she tell him and cause him that pain? If she wants one, she gets one. Her body, that's that.

[kath]

25. not if the fetus is the result of an affair.

[adigal]

21. Then what, pray tell, is notification for, if not for the husband

to stop the abortion?? It makes no sense otherwise. It is a slippery slope to allowing men, who, in the long run, can walk away from the pregnancy, to force the pregnancy.

And I am pretty much against abortions after 12 weeks, except in the case of disabilities or the health of the mother. But, really, if I have not told my husband I am pregnant, we obviously have some pretty serious problems that Judge Alito might just want us to pray away, perhaps in public school.

This guy is dangerous and a real asshole.

[napi21]

8. I agree with you, as long as there is an exception written into the law

that gives a married woman an out if the pregnancy is the result of forced sex by an abusive husband, and a teen pregnancy was the result of incest.

I think it's mandatory that exceptions be actually written into the law, or come courts will misinterpret the intent.

[Igel]

16. They apparently were in the law.

The woman had to sign saying she informed the husband (no further evidence needed), or that she feared the consequences of notifying him, or that the child wasn't his. There were a few other exceptions, too.

But saying she feared the consequences is pretty subjective.

First amendment folk frequently say that X wouldn't stop freedom of speech, but it would 'chill freedom of speech'. That's what this law would have done concering abortion: it's not that the law actually stopped action, but it might give some pause and cause them not to pursue an action.

[papau]

12. An abortion is Time critical - a tatoo is not time critical n/t

n/t

[Doctor_J]

15. wmillls, do you have a web page or something

with your beliefs explained on it? Your posts today have been straight from the Bushlover's Handbook, from "What rights have you lost?" (other posters listed a couple dozen) to "a woman should get the father's consent for an abortion". Are you sure you're in the correct forum?

[Baconfoot]

18. Common sense says to protect the lives of young women.

The bottom line is that in states with parental notification laws the young women either injure themselves, get injured by their parents (who are either angry about the fact that the young woman had sex, agry at her for getting raped, or angry at her for being the victim of incest), or go to neighboring states. When there are no neighboring states left, guess what the consequences will be?

We don't want dead young women - we want healthy ones.

There's your common sense.

[Skittles]

22. as opposed to republicans like you?

nt

[KittyWampus]

3. Suppose the fetus results from sex with someone other than the husband?

[wmills551]

6. Might want to talk about it.

[RobertSeattle]

5. 600 pagges? Geesh

I wonder if there is a line "British Intelligence has learned that Alito is one heck of a guy".

[3waygeek]

11. Unfortunately, that mainstream flows

directly into the River Styx. :evilgrin:

[beltanefauve]

14. It's about CIVIL rights!

Moreso than right-to-privacy as Roe V wade has been framed. Women can get pregnant. Men cannot. Notification laws are a blatant violation of civil rights and are about control.

[Rose Siding]

17. AP goes with "mainstream", Knight Ridder says "activist"

snip>
But in his more than 60 dissents over that time - as in the strip-search case - he's been more outspoken about areas of law that he finds dissatisfying and how he might change them.

Those opinions reveal more of a conservative activist, a judge who'd make it harder to prove race- and gender-discrimination claims, limit Congress's regulatory reach and - as the strip-search case suggests - lower the bar for search and seizure standards.

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/13084055.htm

[MasonJar]

23. Yes, and I'm a greased pig!

[Democat]

24. Democrats better undermine him now or the public will believe the lies

Democrats cannot take a "wait and see" approach because Republicans are trying to spin this extremist as mainstream.

Democrats need to educate the public right now on his extremism.

If they wait, they will have another "Kerry is a flip flopper" situation, except this time it will be "Alito is mainstream." If Democrats plan to filibuster, they must make the American people understand that he is an extremist right now, before it's too late.