Vilifying Alito
Posted on November 4, 2005
We’ve heard it already: statements by left-wing special interest groups, Democrat congressional representatives, and — eghad! — even the honorable Chairman of the Democtat Party: Samuel Alito as a Supreme Court Justice would turn the clock back, would resurrect an era of back-alley abortions and maimed, killed women who simply wanted a choice. (That this choice involves the freedom to kill innocent life is never quite mentioned, of course.)
This all follows from a case involving spousal notification for abortion that came before Alito’s 3rd Circut Federal Court. If you want details on the infamous 1991 Alito dissent as regards Planned Parenthood v. Casey, please visit Patterico’s Pontifications for an exellent dissection thereof. As Patterico predicted on 30 October:
Democrats will, of course, distort Judge Alito’s dissent. They will say: “Judge Alito thinks that women should have to consult with their husbands before having an abortion. Evidently he views married women as nothing more than their husbands’ property. Also, he is insensitive to the fact that battered women aren’t going to get an abortion if they have to tell their husbands about it first. If Judge Alito is confirmed, the right of married women to obtain abortions will be severely restricted.”
Charles Krauthammer is onto this predictable leftist elite tirade against Alito like white on rice. He takes his readers through a logical exercise to spell out exactly how Alito’s dissent has been contorted beyond recognition by liberals. I can’t really begin to summarize Krauthammer’s arcane logic, but I encourage you to read the column. Krauthammer’s point is that Alito worked assisuously with what had been provided by the SCOTUS up to that time and made the most logical and thoughtful decision he could based on precedent.
The attacks on Alito as a heartless ogre who would rather see abused women beaten and mamed by their husbands than go have a private abortion are specious at best; in fact Krauthammer argues they are utterly reprehensible:
This may all seem arcane, but it requires slogging through arcana to see just how dishonest, disreputable and disgraceful is the charge, trumpeted by just about every liberal interest group, that Alito is so extreme and insensitive to women’s needs that he supports spousal notification for abortion.
Alito’s Casey opinion no more tells you whether he “supports” the policy of spousal notification than whether he likes foie gras with his pudding. The only thing it tells you is that based on scrupulous parsing of Supreme Court precedents — or more particularly, of Sandra Day O’Connor’s precedents on permissible restrictions on abortion — he concluded that spousal notification met the court’s own standard for constitutionality.
Krauthammer actually identifies the main culprit as O’Connor, who apparently did some pretty bizarre constitutional zig-zagging to define “undue burden” tests in several fun and exciting ways during her tenure on the court, both pre- and post-Casey. Alito gets no respect for his efforts at daring to apply her logic, only vilification by the left. As to be expected.
As for future attacks on Alito, Krauthammer has some predictions:
In the coming days you will hear that Alito “supports” strip searches of 10-year-olds and the private possession of machine guns. The Brady anti-gun campaign has already called Alito “Machine Gun Sammy.” You will also hear that he is hostile to minorities, immigrants, women, workers, the disabled, the environment . . . you name it. These claims are based on the same distortion that we see in attacks on Alito’s abortion ruling in Casey — the deliberate confusion of a constitutional judgment (almost invariably based on the Supreme Court’s own precedents) with a personal policy preference.
I don’t doubt that a large part of the “agreed-upon” delay of the Alito hearings until January 2006 is a cabal by the Democrats to allow as much time as possible for the left-wing special interest groups to gin up more such fallacious distortions of Samuel Alito’s distinguished record as a prosecutor and a jurist. They surely also hope to keep him off of the court as long as possible, so as to get a few more serpentine arguments from O’Connor firmly fixed into the Supreme Court record.
It’s the only way they can “win” anymore, those rascally Democrats: through distortion and manipulation of the Judiciary (not to mention the truth). It’s all they have left, and they realize that they’re losing grip on it fast. The best part will be watching them spiral downward by virtue of their own weighty mendacity… but at what cost to Samuel Alito in the process?
Cross-posted at TMH’s Bacon Bits and The Wide Awakes
A little addition: Their was a blogger conference call today with the White House advisor on the nomination and confirmation process of Alito. Blogs for Bush has the roundup.
» Filed Under Abortion, News, Supreme Court
Trackback URL
Comments
2 Responses to “Vilifying Alito”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
I expect Sam Alito’s a big boy and can take the “slings and arrows of outrageous moonbats” [apologies to The bard].
What I’m disturbed by is the very real possibility that Republican’t Senators will be unable to locate and dose themselves with enough synthetic testosterone to make up for their self-imposed status as Eunuchs of the Congress.
David, I share your concern re testosterone, but a bit less so now that through the Miers debacle, the base done raised up on it’s haunches and made whole lotta noise. I think the time is ripe for a fight. (fingers crossed)