This is the tenth letter in our ongoing campaign to voice our objections to Samuel Alito’s nomination to the Supreme Court.

Working on this, the lyrics to Cyndi Lauper’s ’84 classic song, “Girl’s Just Want to Have Fun,” played in my mind. Considering Alito, these words cried out:
“Some boys take a beautiful girl
And hide her away from the rest of the world
I want to be the one to walk in the sun
Oh girls they want to have fun”

Diaries to date:

Diary for Day 1,
Diary for Day 2,
Diary for Day 3,
Diary for Day 4,
Diary for Day 5,
Diary for Day 6,
Diary for Day 7,
Diary for Day 8,
Diary for Day 9

Continuing Action: After the Diary for Day 12 is available, print them all and make booklets to handout from Dec. 23rd to Jan. 9.

Please feel free to amend, to adapt, to personalize this message.

Three groups to contact:

your senators, the Judiciary Committee, and your representatives

Sources: Save Our Courts, ThinkProgress, and the National Women’s Law Center

Dear Senator,

In 1981 President Reagan nominated Sandra Day O’Connor to the Supreme Court, honoring his pledge to nominate a woman if given the opportunity.

If you review Justice O’Connor’s work experience you will find that upon completing her law degree at Stanford, she was unable to find a job in a law firm. One firm offered her the position of secretary. This was in 1952.

President Bush, speaking about his choice for the Supreme Court, said in September, 2005, “I will pick a person who can do the job. But I am mindful that diversity is one of the strengths of the country.”

Now you are being asked to consider Judge O’Connor’s replacement, Judge Samuel Alito.

When you examine his opinions on the Third Circuit, you will discover in the case Sheridan v. E.I.DuPont de Nemours and Co., that Alito’s lone dissent would have prevented a woman claiming gender discrimination from going to trial, even though she had produced evidence.

In another case, Chittister v. Department of Community and Economic Development, Alito’s opinion found that Congress lacked the power under the Constitution to allow state employees to sue for damages when their employers refuse to comply with the medical leave provisions of FMLA.

Besides being a challenge to the role of Congress, significant in itself, Alito’s opinion does not indicate any recognition of the importance of the underlying reason for FMLA, i.e., to “promote the goal of equal employment opportunity for women and men.”

As the judicial hearings proceed, it is imperative that Judge Alito be questioned skillfully and carefully in regards to gender discrimination. Keep in mind that he has already acknowledged he will say anything to get a job.

In 1952 Sandra Day O’Connor had no recourse when she experienced discrimination. It would seem Judge Samuel Alito would return us to those “good old days.” I do not want to take that risk. I consider Alito unacceptable for the Supreme Court. His nomination should be rejected.


0 0 votes
Article Rating