Supreme Court justice nominee Samuel
A. Alito Jr. was the single dissent in a three judge appeal that decided
even incorrigible prisoners have a basic right to read current periodicals
while imprisoned. Alito’s dissenting opinion in the Pennsylvania prison
case favored prison managers who had decided to withhold reading materials
(except for legal documents and religious literature). The lawyers for
the prisoners claimed that the 1st Amendment gave them the right to read
periodicals. The LATimes quotes one of the lawyers saying that, “”Precluding
them from receiving information from periodicals about current political,
social and other activities outside the prison walls … offends the free
speech component of the 1st Amendment,” their lawyer said.” The Supreme
Court will hear the case in March. If confirmed, Alito is expected to recuse
himself setting up a possible 4-4 tie.
Google
the case: Beard v. Banks, 04-1739.
“Supreme
Court to Review a Pa. Prison Policy That Alito Backed in Dissent.”
-By Charles Lane, WashingtonPost
“High
court to hear cases on prison reading, lawsuits.” -AP via CNN
“Alito
Dissent Resonates in Supreme Court Case.” -By David G. Savage, LATimes
anagram
pointed out by the New Yorker…
Samuel Alito = I am a sellout