Thread: Supreme Court Appoints Advocate to Argue Immigration Case

Cayla99 wrote:

"Texas2step wrote:

Quote:
"The Court issued an order Thursday appointing Amanda Leiter, a professor at Catholic University's Columbus School of Law and former clerk to Justice John Paul Stevens, to argue in favor of the decision below in an immigration case, Kucana v. Holder."

Perhaps having 5 (and soon 6) Catholic judges on the U.S. Supreme Court is going to become an additional danger to court impartiality in subtle ways we were not allowed to voice during their confirmation hearings.


And precisely what is that supposed to mean? Catholics are not qualified to be Justices? Perhaps you would prefer the deportation of all Catholics? The above statement is bigotry pure in simple and I think you owe all of the Catholics on this board an apology."


My Reply:

Cayla99 also wrote me a personal message about this, to which I have replied in detail in private. I have retained a copy of my reply which I will be glad to forward privately to any one else on this board who was offended by what I wrote. My post was not intended as "anti-Catholic", and I do not consider what I wrote bigotry.

I think there is an important lesson here for all to review.

One, people from all religions are welcome at ALIPAC except for the Satanists. We discriminate against satanists, but that's about it.


Clearly, most Catholics in America are against illegal immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens.

Only a certain faction within the Catholic church's leadership is pro illegal immigration and pro amnesty because parts of the church are clearly seeking political and financial gain from illegal immigration.

Everyone here at ALIPAC must realize that our goal is to unify Americans of every race, religion, and creed in our political cause.

Therefore, if you are going to talk about race, religion, or creed's on our website you should do so with caution and only if you are absolutely certain you have the ability to do so without offending others that share your concerns about illegal immigration.

Where we must be able to discuss the Catholic religion and the overt attempts by parts of the Catholic church to aid and abet illegal aliens, each statement made or opinion shared on such sensitive issues MUST MAKE IT CLEAR THAT YOU ARE NOT BASHING ALL CATHOLICS.

At the same time, we don't need to rush to judgement against each other. Considering the positions of parts of the Catholic church, the identity of 5-6 Supreme Court members being aligned with the church is fair game for discussion.

We are not going to allow anyone to intentionally insult or bash entire demographic or religious groups on our boards as our core mission is to unify Americans to save this nation and not to further divide and conquer ourselves. We also do not want people to feel overly oppressed as they try to express their feelings here with fellow patriots.

These boards are a highly public place with friends and enemies all around you. Think about how others may interpret anything you say that comes close to the line about large groups of people and if you cannot weigh those sensitives well then please do not approach those topics in your posts.

It is hard to do that when things make us all angry. Let's all work together to pull everyone together.

I know it stinks to have to write like a lawyer writing small print sometimes, but others appreciate those efforts.


William Gheen
President of ALIPAC

As a praticing Catholic, I must admit that I have been less than thrilled with the position that some of those in leadership positions have taken in respect to illegal immigrants. Any church which would provide sanctuary to an illegal invader, as they evade justice, has some explaining to do, IMO. The Catholic church has done this a few times if i'm not mistaken.

With that said, I did not take offense to Texas 2 Step's comments. I may have framed it a little differently, but the rational behind the comment is valid.

I might have said: considering the contrary position regarding illegal immigration that some of those in leadership positions within the Catholic church have taken, do you believe we need to be concerned that 2/3'rds of the Supreme Court Justices might share those same beliefs given they are also Catholic?

We are talking about the Supreme Court here. Those are valid questions.

Then again, Sotomayor is a card carrying-board member of la raza and not one question was asked of her during confirmation hearings regarding her position on illegal immigration and securing our borders.

I think we all know what position la raza has taken on this matter.

Not because she was Catholic nor because she was a member of la raza. Guess those in the Senate Judiciary committee do not feel this is important enough to discuss.

Judge Sotomayor lets add her interest in International Law, also.

ALIPAC against satanists? Oh, no, gotta run ... just kidding.

Seriously, thank you W.

And from me personally, thank you NoBueno.

I have a million reasons not to confirm Sotomayor, but her religion is not one of them.