Environmental & Conservation Groups Nix Alito for Supreme Court

From: Environment News Service <www.ens-newswire.com>

56 Environmental, Conservation Groups Nix Alito for Supreme Court

WASHINGTON, DC, January 24, 2006 (ENS) - The Senate Judiciary Committee
today recommended Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito on a party line vote,
10 to 8. Alito¹s nomination will now go to the full Senate.

In a letter to the U.S. Senate released Monday, the nonprofit environmental
law firm Earthjustice and 55 other conservation groups urged the Senate to
oppose the confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito Jr. to a lifetime seat on the
Supreme Court. None of these groups opposed the confirmation of Chief
Justice John Roberts.

"Conservation and environmental groups did not oppose President Bush's
previous Supreme Court nominations of D.C. Circuit Judge John G. Roberts,
Jr. and White House Counsel Harriet Miers. Indeed, we have not urged the
Senate to oppose any of the eight Supreme Court nominations since Robert
Bork, whom some of the undersigned groups opposed in 1987," the letter
states.

"Earthjustice has not opposed a Supreme Court nominee since Judge Robert
Bork in 1987," said Glenn Sugameli, Earthjustice senior judicial counsel.
"Judge Alito's record indicates that he would pursue his own extreme legal
theories to create new barriers that prevent enforcement of laws that
protect families and communities from pollution. The Senate should refuse to
confirm Judge Alito."

The environmental community has united around the opposition of Judge Alito
to a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court for four main reasons, Earthjustice
states.

Commerce Clause: Judge Alito's record, including most prominently
his dissent in Rybar v. United States, indicates that he has a very narrow
view of the Congress's authority under the Constitution's Commerce Clause,
which underlies most federal environmental laws. During the hearing, Judge
Alito refused to acknowledge his faulty reasoning even though the Supreme
Court has essentially rejected his argument. In February, the Court is
scheduled to hear oral arguments on the scope of the Commerce Clause in two
critical cases that could restrict the geographic jurisdiction of the Clean
Water Act to a small fraction of its current coverage.

Standing and Access to Courts: Judge Alito has placed
unjustifiable hurdles in front of citizens that are trying to make polluting
corporations comply with basic environmental safeguards. His record
indicates that he will shut the courthouse doors on citizens who are injured
by polluting companies. In PIRG v. Magnesium Elektron, Judge Alito
overturned a $2.6 million dollar verdict against a polluter that violated
its Clean Water Act permit more than 150 times. In his hearing testimony,
Judge Alito refused to acknowledge that the subsequent Supreme Court
decision in Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw invalidated the reasoning he
employed to deny the plaintiffs their day in court.

Corporate Interests: Judge Alito joined a 2-1 decision to overturn
an Environmental Protection Agency emergency cleanup order under the Safe
Drinking Water Act for cleaning toxic pollution out of the City of Lansing,
Michigan's aquifer ­ the drinking water supply for 180,000 people

Hearing Testimony: Judge Alito did not alleviate these concerns
during his recent hearing before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary.

"Americans depend upon the Supreme Court to uphold and enforce our nation's
environmental safeguards," said Buck Parker, Earthjustice executive
director. "After a careful analysis of Judge Samuel Alito's record, we
believe that he would likely side with polluters and against citizens in
disputes over environmental protection. Judge Alito's history indicates that
he will choose his own extreme personal beliefs over the enforcement of
environmental laws."

"With smoggy cities, dirty rivers, mercury contaminated fish and other
threats, Americans cannot afford to confirm a Supreme Court justice who
would unfairly side with polluters," said Sugameli. "Judge Alito's
nomination must be defeated."

The 56 groups that signed the letter to the U.S. Senate are: Alaska Center
for the Environment, Alaska Wildlife Alliance, Arkansas Nature Alliance,
Buckeye Forest Council, Californians for Alternatives to Toxics, Center for
Biological Diversity, Center for Native Ecosystems, Citizens for Public
Resources, Citizens Progressive Alliance, Clean Water Action Council of N.E.
Wisconsin, Inc., Clean Water Action, Colorado Environmental Coalition,
Community Rights Counsel, Conservation Northern California Council,
Conservation Northwest, Earthjustice, Ecological Conservation Organization,
Endangered Habitats League, Endangered Species Coalition, Environmental Law
Foundation, Environmental Protection Information Center, Federation of Fly
Fishers, Forest Guardians, Friends of the Columbia Gorge, Friends of the
Earth, Friends of the Inyo, Gifford Pinchot Task Force, Great Old Broads for
Wilderness, Green Delaware, Greenpeace, Heartwood, Kentucky Resources
Council, Inc., League of Conservation Voters, Leavenworth Audubon
Adopt-a-Forest, McKenzie Guardians, Michigan Nature Association, Missouri
Forest Alliance, Musconetcong Mountain Conservancy, National Environmental
Trust, Natural Resources Defense Council, Northwest Environmental Advocates,
Okanogan Highlands Alliance, Olympic Forest Coalition, Oregon Center for
Environmental Health, Oregon Natural Resources Council Fund, Sagebrush Sea
Campaign, San Juan Citizens Alliance, Sierra Club, Sierra Student Coalition,
Society of Natural Resources Conservation, Soda Mountain Wilderness Council,
Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, Valley Watch, Inc., Western
Environmental Law Center, Wilderness Society, and Wildlands CPR.