Two Bar Groups Say No on Alito

If Samuel Alito Jr. is confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court (and, for better or worse, he will be), don’t expect him to speak anytime soon before some California bar groups. This week California Women Lawyers and the Bar Association of San Francisco announced formal opposition to Alito’s nomination.

California Women Lawyers announced its opposition Friday. “After a careful review of Judge Alito’s writings and decisions, CWL advised the Senate Judiciary chair and Sen. Dianne Feinstein that Judge Alito’s record has not demonstrated the kind of fairness, independence and considered judgment that the American people should be able to expect from a United States Supreme Court nominee,? said the group’s president, Pearl Gondrella Mann, in a written statement.

BASF announced Tuesday that its board had voted 23-2 to oppose the nomination. The board cited Alito’s views on reproductive freedom and privacy; civil rights and discrimination; separation of church and state; civil liberties and limits on Congressional power as the basis for their opposition. Those views “are incompatible with existing precedents and by degrees, may deviate from faithful application of core tenets of the Constitution recognized by this Bar Association,? the board said in a statement.

Scott Graham


2 Responses to “Two Bar Groups Say No on Alito”

  1. Vish Says:

    I’m not a lawyer, but I’ve enjoyed reading this, and am subscribing. As for Alito, good grief…

  2. confidentialservices Says:

    I’m also not an attorney, and I to have enjoyed reading this and all of your recent posts. I would like to say that I dissagre about the post’s assesment of Judge Samuel Alito.

    I watched as much as I could of the confirmation hearings personally, and I found him to be very personalble and forthcoming in his responses except where I feel that any more disclosure would have been improper. Having said that I’m not an attorney, I am a private investigator and reasonably familiar with law in general, and the legal process, and I find it significant that the American Bar Association several judges who by their own claim are liberal came forward in his support. I noted one in particular, a black man who openly stated that he was a pro choice activist. This individual addressed both the question of weather Judge Alito was capable of ruling fairly on abortion cases, and that of weather Alito could rule fairly on civil rights issues. The Judge reported to the committee that Alito dispite his dissagreement on some issues, not only could, but that he had a proven track record of such. I think the difference that the California Women Lawyers and the San Francisco Bar Associations have with Alito are based in disparities between the legal cultures between the jurisdictions where each operates. The legal culture in California in particular and the rest of the west coast to a lesser degree has made no apology or attemt to conceal its extream liberal bias, whereas the legal cultures in the parts of the United States served by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals is more conservatively based. As we all know, the sum of our own backgrounds filters our perception of the world and in this circumstance, our view of what is or what is not appropriate in the judges decisions. The culture in which we studied the legal system would certainly be a part of the sum of our backgrounds.

    That said, I reiterate that I enjoy your writings, and I will be looking in on them as often as I can. Keep up the good work.

    Michael Cahoon

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: