Thread: Ethnic hustlers in a dither over new Alito info

http://www.civilrights.org/issues/nomin ... m?id=38368

Alito Memo Called for Denying Constitutional Protections to Non-U.S. Citizens, Causes Alarm Among Hispanic Leaders
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 1, 2005
Estuardo V. . Rodriguez, Jr
202-463-4806

Documents released this week by the Justice Department from 1986 show Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, as then Deputy Assistant Attorney General under the Reagan Administration, arguing strongly against constitutional protections being afforded to undocumented immigrants and foreign nationals residing in the U.S.

Legislative Staff Attorney for MALDEF's Washington, D.C. office, Peter Zamora, summarized, "In a 1986 letter to FBI Director William Webster, Alito offers a cramped, troubling interpretation of the constitutional protections properly afforded to undocumented immigrants. In writing that the Constitution "grants only fundamental rights to illegal aliens within the United States," Alito ignores a significant body of caselaw to the contrary. Significantly, he ignores the landmark case of Plyler v. Doe, brought by MALDEF and decided in 1982, which held that undocumented immigrants are protected under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, even in the context where the right is not "fundamental." Alito's legal interpretation in this matter was strained and misguided, and the implications of elevating this interpretation to the Supreme Court are deeply troubling for those concerned with protecting immigrants' rights."

"The Senate needs to question Alito vigorously on his statements. What he suggested calls for the creation of a subclass of people who would be entirely vulnerable to abuse and victimization by unscrupulous people," said Irasema Garza, spokesperson for HFJ and AFSCME representative. "As a community, we must urge our Senators to question Alito on what he meant and how far he was willing to go in denying constitutional protections to immigrants and foreign nationals that contribute greatly to this country."

Congresswoman Linda T. Sánchez, vice-chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus' Civil Rights Task Force added that, "Judge Alito's nomination represents an abandonment of the principle that the Supreme Court should be comprised of highly qualified individuals with backgrounds, experiences and heritages that reflect the diversity of America. As we get to know more about Judge Alito, I am concerned with his record of undermining civil rights, as he has been one of the most conservative federal judges in the country. I urge my Senate colleagues to look through his record carefully and for all Americans to pay close attention to this process as this appointment will have consequences for decades to come,"

HFJ Spokesperson and St. Mary's University School of Law Professor, Reynaldo Valencia, remarked, "Each new troubling revelation regarding Judge Alito's personal views on affirmative action, voting rights, immigrant rights, and other issues of importance to the Latino community further reinforces the need for a thorough review and investigation of his judicial philosophy, and whether that philosophy will hurt or advance the interests of Latinos."

HFJ will continue its National Judicial Briefing Tour on Tuesday, December 13, 2005 in Denver, Colorado with a presentation on what's at stake for Latinos with the Alito nomination and a new Supreme Court. For more information contact Gabriela Ventura at gventura@rabengroup.com

Hispanics for a Fair Judiciary (HFJ) was formed in April 2005 through the efforts of Alliance for Justice in order to provide Hispanic leaders across the nation a platform and voice in matters related to our nation's judicial system. HFJ consists of Hispanic civil rights leaders as well as Hispanic state and local elected officials. The group is led by long-time civil rights advocates Raul Yzaguirre, former president of the National Council of La Raza and Dolores Huerta, as well as MALDEF and PRLDEF.

================================================== =======

Hispanics for a fair judiciary? What a joke. They don't want it to be fair. They just want their own lackeys in their so they can legislate from the bench in favor of their illegal alien brethren. Maybe Bush can give them another 4 mil of our money. I'm surprised that Bush is even allowing this guy to go through the process. I didn't think he'd allow a judicial nominee to threaten his and Vicente's reconquista agenda.

wow I guess Iam for aaaaaaaaaaaitttto for sumpreme court then-

Plyler vs Doe was actually a split decision which passed by a vote of 1. It can and should be limited by future decisions and overturned by an act of Congress.

Alito for Supreme Court

Sure changes MY opinion of him too! Maybe he WILL work out. Bush probably didn't do a background check on him either so this is probably the first he's heard of that.

Oh please let it be so!

What kind of a name is Alito anyway? It sounds Japanese, but the guy is whiter than me.

So is Michael Jackson, though.

Alito is an Italian American

I love this guy more and more, roberts and Alito are both great choices in my opinion and i think he will make a great addittion. He is a strict constitutionlist. The 14 amendment is so misintepreted and i hope we finally sort all this out as soon as he becomes SCJ.

I resently went to a constitutional convention on interpetation by the Consitutional soceity it was great! Thier is alot of talk about the 14 and what it means as it relates to immigrates.

The hispanic group is worried about thier illegals, it has nothing to do with immigrates!

P

You have to remember that when these lawyers worked for Reagan, they wrote for Reagan expressing Reagan's opinion, "not their own". Roberts made this very clear during his confirmation.

Reagan said "A nation without borders is not a nation."

Reagan was "our guy".

These men wrote for Reagan expressing Reagan's views or supporting his agenda.

Now, they'll be writing for Bush or themselves and you have no idea what they think or what they'll do until you hear them in the confirmation hearings.

Hold support until then is my suggestion.

We've been tricked by people left and right which is why we are in the huge mess we are in now. I'd be very surprised if Bush nominated anyone to the court that did not have the Globalist View and Understanding.

Reagan was opposed to Globalism.

I have to agree with you, Judy. I'm reserving judgement because both Roberts AND Alito are Bush's men and I want to actually SEE how Roberts rules on some cases before I really support him ALTHOUGH I do think he is a BRILLIANT man. And, I am interested in the hearings on Alito. Since I have issues OTHER THAN illegal immigration, I need to consider all aspects of his appointment. I don't want to see the COURTS STACKED on EITHER side. I want jurists who represent NO SPECIAL INTERESTS.

The only special interest I would support is the American Interest.