Jeff Toobin on CNN thinks Casey v. Planned Parenthood will be crucial

[highplainsdem]

to the opposition to Alito.

He also stressed that Alito's opinions have been more rightwing and controversial since he was first appointed to the bench than they were before, so he doesn't think the earlier confirmations mean as much in this dispute as they would have if he'd been confirmed earlier after expressing such controversial opinions.

[babylonsister]

1. I'm glad to hear this and agree.

Whoever voted for him 15 years ago have an absolute right to change their opinion now. 15 years is a long time; many of Alito's decisions are in writing, and people should be learning, growing, and shaping their opinions as they age. BTW, that was one item that the blivet said about Meiers that really was telling; 'she won't ever change'. Then what's the point?

[papau]

2. I agree-here's a list of Alito's action that prove him unfit for SupremeCT

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/31/samuel-alitos-america

Samuel Alito’s America

ALITO WOULD OVERTURN ROE V. WADE: In his dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Alito concurred with the majority in supporting the restrictive abortion-related measures passed by the Pennsylvania legislature in the late 1980’s. Alito went further, however, saying the majority was wrong to strike down a requirement that women notify their spouses before having an abortion. The Supreme Court later rejected Alito’s view, voting to reaffirm Roe v. Wade.

ALITO WOULD ALLOW RACE-BASED DISCRIMINATION: Alito dissented from a decision in favor of a Marriott Hotel manager who said she had been discriminated against on the basis of race. The majority explained that Alito would have protected racist employers by “immuniz an employer from the reach of Title VII if the employer’s belief that it had selected the ‘best’ candidate was the result of conscious racial bias.”

ALITO WOULD ALLOW DISABILITY-BASED DISCRIMINATION: In Nathanson v. Medical College of Pennsylvania, the majority said the standard for proving disability-based discrimination articulated in Alito’s dissent was so restrictive that “few if any…cases would survive summary judgment.”

ALITO WOULD STRIKE DOWN THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT: The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) “guarantees most workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for a loved one.” The 2003 Supreme Court ruling upholding FMLA essentially reversed a 2000 decision by Alito which found that Congress exceeded its power in passing the law.

ALITO SUPPORTS UNAUTHORIZED STRIP SEARCHES: In Doe v. Groody, Alito agued that police officers had not violated constitutional rights when they strip searched a mother and her ten-year-old daughter while carrying out a search warrant that authorized only the search of a man and his home.

ALITO HOSTILE TOWARD IMMIGRANTS: In two cases involving the deportation of immigrants, the majority twice noted Alito’s disregard of settled law. In Dia v. Ashcroft, the majority opinion states that Alito’s dissent “guts the statutory standard” and “ignores our precedent.” In Ki Se Lee v. Ashcroft, the majority stated Alito’s opinion contradicted “well-recognized rules of statutory construction.”