The discussion revolves around Samuel Alito's past affiliations and statements, particularly his membership in the "Concerned Alumni of Princeton" and his financial dealings related to Vanguard mutual funds. Participants explore the implications of these aspects on his credibility and judicial conduct, touching on themes of ethics, conservatism, and personal beliefs.
Participants express differing views on Alito's credibility and the implications of his past affiliations and financial interests. There is no consensus on whether his actions constitute a conflict of interest or how they reflect on his judicial philosophy.
Participants note the lack of direct statements from Alito in the discussion, which may limit the understanding of his views and intentions. The conversation also reflects ongoing concerns about ethical standards for judges and the influence of personal beliefs on judicial decisions.
This discussion may be of interest to those following judicial ethics, political affiliations of judges, and the implications of personal beliefs on legal rulings.
(emphases added)The group had been founded in 1972, the year that Judge Alito graduated, by alumni upset that Princeton had recently begun admitting women. It published a magazine, Prospect, which persistently accused the administration of taking a permissive approach to student life, of promoting birth control and paying for abortions, and of diluting the explicitly Christian character of the school.
As Princeton admitted a growing number of minority students, Concerned Alumni charged repeatedly that the administration was lowering admission standards, undermining the university's distinctive traditions and admitting too few children of alumni. "Currently alumni children comprise 14 percent of each entering class, compared with an 11 percent quota for blacks and Hispanics," the group wrote in a 1985 fund-raising letter sent to all Princeton graduates.
WASHINGTON - Judge Samuel Alito has said he did not break a federal ethics law when he ruled in a case involving the company that handles his mutual fund investments.
Legal experts are divided over whether Alito did anything wrong in the case three years ago. Of more immediate concern is his explanation of his role in that case - along with questions about what his recusal practices will be if confirmed to the high court.
Alito reported holdings of about $80,000 in Vanguard funds in 1990. Last year, he reported shares in 14 Vanguard Group mutual funds, worth $455,000 to $1 million.
In 1990, when Alito was seeking US Senate approval for his nomination to be a circuit judge, he said in written answers to a questionnaire that he would disqualify himself from ''any cases involving the Vanguard companies."
After Alito ruled in Vanguard's favor in the Maharaj case, he complained about her efforts to vacate his decision and remove him from the case, writing to the chief administrative judge of the federal appeals court on which he sat in 2003: ''I do not believe that I am required to disqualify myself based on my ownership of the mutual fund shares."
Here is a quote from 1985.loseyourname said:You know, when I enter a thread entitled "Some of Alito's views," I kind of expect to see something either written or said by Alito, or perhaps a ruling of his.
From the same document."I am and always have been a conservative and an adherent to the same philosophical views that I believe are central to this administration."
"I am particularly proud of my contributions in recent cases in which the government has argued in the Supreme Court that racial and ethnic quotas should not be allowed and that the Constitution does not protect a right to abortion."
He specifically said in his confirmation hearing that he would recuse hinself in any case regarding Vanguard.edward said:The delima here is that Alito can not own an interest in a company on which he make a ruling. Alito says that he only owns shares in Vanguard. Vanguard says that it is owned by it's shareholders.
In 1990, when Alito was seeking US Senate approval for his nomination to be a circuit judge, he said in written answers to a questionnaire that he would disqualify himself from ''any cases involving the Vanguard companies."