Carol Platt Liebau: Alito & Abortion

Monday, November 14, 2005

Alito & Abortion

Hopefully, Senate Republicans like Arlen Specter are learning why, exactly, the President wanted hearings for the Alito nomination to be scheduled before Christmas.

The long gap between the nomination and the hearing offers liberal plenty of time to manufacture arguments against his confirmation.

Case in point: Liberals are going to go crazy over the information contained in this piece -- which notes that Judge Alito wrote, back in 1985, that he didn't believe there was a constitutional right to abortion.

But even liberals should, in fairness, consider that (1) Judge Alito's views may have shifted over time; and (2) that he may have gained greater appreciation for the virtues of stare decisis during his tenure as a judge.

But above all, it should be made crystal clear to everyone in America that believing that abortion isn't a right secured by the constitution is hardly out of the mainstream. Chief Justice William Rehnquist didn't believe it, nor did Justice Byron White -- nor has any Republican presidential candidate since 1980 -- nor, most consequentially, does a sizable proportion of the American public.


Blogger wile e coyote said...

Carol, it is beneath you to try to spin this news disingenuously.

The memo is the "smoking gun" for those seeking evidence on where Alito stands on these basic issues.

The memo shows that President Bush has actually nominated a judge whose views coincide with the kind of judges candidate Bush promised to nominate. Gasp.

Ginsburg and Breyer did not have to sneak into the Supreme Court through the back door. Why should Alito?

In supporting stealth candidates, Republicans have been running from a fight they should have welcomed. Come on Carol, let's have at them (liberals)

1:37 PM  
Blogger American by Choice said...

Carol, I'm with rzafft, even if he/she hasn't told me what France's values are yet. No way, no point, no honor to spin this one. What's happened to our bold hostess?

Alito should simply say his view of Roe v Wade is the same as Justice Ginsburg's. And follow up with all the precedent boilerplate as Roberts did.

1:54 PM  
Blogger wile e coyote said...

Dear ABC,

I posted a second comment on the French blog. Did you not see it, or did you find the comment unsatisfying?

2:07 PM  
Blogger American by Choice said...


Got it! Sorry about that.

I'm going to read what you wrote again. On first reading, you describe a pretty funny sort of liberty that they offer, and there's neither equality or fraternity for the newcomer at all. That indeed is my perception and experience (over forty years now, starting from being distinctly francophile - Scots and French vs the auld enemy - and ending in the opposite place) but I didn;t think it was yours.

Frankly I don't think they deserve magnanimity at this point for either their domestic or foreign policy behavior. I wish I did.

5:12 PM  
Blogger Greg said...

There! It's been said. A nominee for the Supreme Court of the United States has (in the distant past) stated that he didn't believe the Constitution supports a right to abortion.


Now let the debate begin!

I agree with the above comments that Republican nominees should not have to sneak into the court. I believe the conservative views more closely match the views of the majority of Americans than do the liberal views.

6:54 AM  
Blogger eLarson said...

The memo is the "smoking gun" for those seeking evidence on where Alito stands on these basic issues.

Who needs a smoking gun? Every conservative nominee is a threat to Roe... if they weren't who would need Nan Aron and the like?

Don't shy away from the debate. Either SCOTUS is for any way the windblows, or it is about the text of the Constitution.

11:03 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home