Skip to main content

View Diary: What a ScAlito Court Would Mean to Me (219 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  More Complex (4.00)
    Alito's opinion just reflects the legal hash that the S. Ct. has made in 11th Amendment cases. Prior to his ruling, the S. Ct. had held that the 11th Amendment barred application of provisions of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) & Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to state employees. See Board of Trustees of the Univ. of Alabama v. Garrett; & Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents.

    When the 11th Amendment (sovereign immunity) issue came up in the FMLA context, most courts followed Garrett & Kimel and barred the suits. A lot of Judges appointed by Democrats ruled the same way as Alito. I don't have all the cites handy, but here's a couple of the cases:

    2nd Circuit:  Hale v. Mann

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/...

    5th Circuit:  Kazmier v. Widmann

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/...

    When the FMLA case, Neveda v. Hibbs, went to the S. Ct., most observers predicted that the Court would follow its "federalism" cases and rule against FMLA coverage. However, Rehnquist & O'Connor switched, turning what had been a 5-4 majorities in Kimel & Garrett, into the short end of a 6-3 margin in Hibbs.

    It will be tough to fault Alito for following what appeared to be the applicable precedent. I think something like 6 Circuits went the same way.

    •  Nonsense (none)
      Those cases were inapposite.

      Please read the Supreme Court decision.

      The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

      by Armando on Thu Nov 03, 2005 at 07:22:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  To The Contrary, Exactly On Point (4.00)
        No, as pointed out below, the cases are precisely on point. There was a 7-1 Circuit split in favor of Alito's position that prior S. Ct. precedent indicated the 11th Amendment barred such suits by state employees.  Sorry if the facts are inconvenient, but it isn't going to do do any good to spread sloppy, poorly researched talking points, as some of the interest groups have done, only to see them easily rebutted at the Judiciary Committee hearings. Did folks learn nothing from the Roberts hearings?
        •  GENDER discrimination (none)
          is the same under the EPC as disability discrimination? You reallty think so? No kidding?

          Sheesh.

          The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

          by Armando on Fri Nov 04, 2005 at 04:31:31 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  you still haven't explained... (none)
            ...how personal sick leave (the provision alito ruled on) serves an equal protection interest - do women get sick more often than men?

            if you're not completely full of crap on this thread you've yet to show any sign of it. the poster you're responding to has it exactly right - it's a sloppy attack that will be easily knocked down. it's counterproductive to those who want to see alito defeated.

            "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity" -Yeats

            by jethropalerobber on Fri Nov 04, 2005 at 08:47:27 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  They were inapposite why? (none)
      You're a lwyer, see if you can tell me why.

      The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

      by Armando on Thu Nov 03, 2005 at 07:29:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (152)
  • Community (59)
  • Baltimore (38)
  • Civil Rights (37)
  • Bernie Sanders (33)
  • Culture (29)
  • Elections (29)
  • Economy (28)
  • Law (25)
  • Texas (23)
  • 2016 (21)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Environment (20)
  • Labor (19)
  • Education (18)
  • Hillary Clinton (18)
  • Racism (17)
  • Politics (17)
  • Media (17)
  • Freddie Gray (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site