Courtesy of the Progress Report:
ALITO SUPPORTS UNAUTHORIZED STRIP SEARCHES: In Doe v. Groody, Alito agued that police officers had not violated constitutional rights when they strip searched a mother and her ten-year-old daughter while carrying out a search warrant that authorized only the search of a man and his home. [Doe v. Groody, 2004]
I'm the father of a 7-month old girl, and I will NOT live in an America where the government can force my daughter to strip and be searched, unclothed, at its whim.
I have no doubt that most Americans feel the same way.
Alito is a disgusting pervert who believes that innocent ten-year old girls should be forced to take off their clothes at the whim of the government.
I'm so goddamned angry right now I could spit fire.
This degenerate administration, led by the filthy, immoral Karl Rove, cheerled by GOP propagandists like the three-time-divorced drug addict Limbaugh, phone sex pervert Bill O'Reilly, and male prostitue Jeff Gannon, nowwants my little girl to be subject to random strip searches when she is TEN YEARS OLD.
Please spread this information far and wide. Make Alito defend it, in detail. Make BUSH defend it, specifically. Ask Republicans why they think innocent ten-year old girls should be STRIP-SEARCHED.
Americans WON'T LIKE THIS. A story like this gets to the heart of this heartless, twisted, un-American, perverted Bush regime.
UPDATE: VERY interesting responses down below. Thank you all for commenting.
There are a lot of criticisms. Some I've taken to heart, others I find very unimpressive.
First, I'm amazed at the willingness of so many people here to find that strip-searching a 10 year old girl is de facto worth it simply because some awful parents use their kids as drug mules, or words to that effect.
This frame immediately sets up a pecking order of what's important in society and in law, and puts the human rights of a child below the possibility of a drug bust.
Was it an important drug bust? Were lives at stake, and the clock ticking? Was searching this child crucial to breaking up a nefarious crime ring?
Well, you don't know that. And neither do I. (And yes, for all of you patting yourselves on the back for reading the case...I also read it, BEFORE I posted this diary.)
Those of you defending Alito's decision -- and tsk-tsking at my incendiary language -- have thrown your moral weight behind a legal decision that says: bustin' drugs is more important than the rights of an innocent ten year old girl. You take it as a matter of absolute faith that this whole investigation was done with 100% professionalism and good will, and that strip-searching the child (which IS exactly what is was, despite the silly parsing below about her not being fully naked) was worth the risk to her well-being and psyche, and worth ignoring her human rights. Because...maybe they'd catch some meth dealers.
Well, maybe the whole investigation was IN FACT done with 100% professionalism and good will, and the cops were a model of manners and restraint. I come from a family of cops, so I'm very sympathetic to the difficulties of the job.
But many of Alito's peers thought that the cops overstepped their bounds, and I agree. Not only that, I feel like the whole frame of the argument in FAVOR of strip searching the child -- in that court, and sadly, from many below -- assumes that because drugs might be found, the strip search of a child is of course wholly warranted.
What a bunch of crap.
Our rights and our laws have a lot of competing values -- disparate "goods" that are in tension. That's why it's difficult to balance them. But I'm pretty shocked how many people are not weighing, AT ALL, the value -- the good -- of not violating an innocent child's rights, no matter who her parents are.
To answer some of you below: No, I can't say I would never, EVER say that a strip search of a child is "worth it" for the good of society. But in my opinion, it should be a case of lives being at stake. And I don't imagine there are many (if any) such cases.
The idea that simply because a kid might be badly used by her parents to hide drugs makes it common sense that "of course we strip search her!" is morally craven. It criminalizes THE CHILD.
And it's all too in line with the type of thinking that gave us the Patriot Act. The thinking is: because a net good MIGHT come out of something, then by all means, violate that person's rights. If nothing good does come out of it, well heck, we tried. And the person who has been violated? ...They'll get over it.
By the way: the girl did NOT have drugs on her, my hardass, law-and-order loving friends.
Here's the bigger question: do you want your kids strip searched? Of course not. But you're kidding yourselves if you think the kind of law that Samuel Alito makes will protect them or you from that happening, because police powers will always win. (Unless you're a member of the NRA with a semi-automatic.)
It's easy to be smug and say "well, I don't hang out in meth labs." Bully for you -- neither do I. But someday when your kids are in school and the cops have gotten some very important tip about a drug ring in her class, and she is strip-searched without your permission, you can thank yourself for that. Because you decided that the evil of drugs (or worse -- some vauge "terrorism," or bogus "terrorism" which is really political dissent) is OF COURSE more important than some little girl's puny, momentary comfort.
And here I repeat: the little girl was NOT concealing drugs, Magruff-the-Crime-Dog fans.
I realize this is incredibly long, my apologies. But one last thing...
All of the hanky-clutching below about this diary being hystericalmade me laugh. Puh-leaze. I wasn't accusing Alito of being as a child molestor. I was saying that he -- and the Republican party -- have perverted values. I stand 100% by my words.
Yes, I'm aware that the "moral degenerate" frame does bring icky things to mind. Good. It's meant to. This is a brutal soundbite culture, and we need to energize our fight. And we need to put them on the defensive
I know some of you find that intellectually and spiritually dishonest. I respect that to some degree, but I STRONGLY disagree.
The FACT is that Alito was willing to stretch police powers beyond the legal limits (in my opinion, and in the opinion of fellow judges) to approve the STRIP SEARCHING OF A TEN YEAR OLD GIRL. Period.
Let Bush and the Republicans explain it. Let Bush and the Republicans parse out just why THIS case merited strip searching a little girl, and let THEM go into the many, many nuances. Let us help people imagine that it could be THEIR kid, rather than some evil drug-dealin' ten-year old. Let the Republicans react to some blunt, take-no-prisoners framing for a change.
Sorry so many of you aren't comfortable with that. I am. Very.