An article in the
Christian Science Monitor suggests that Alito might not be as rabidly anti-abortion as the right-wingers desperately hope he is.
But the true test of appeals court judges isn't which personal views they hold, but to what extent those personal views may influence how they rule in a particular case.
On this issue, legal analysts disagree in their assessments of Judge Alito. Some say he is a conservative ideologue. Others say he is a smart, careful jurist who leaves personal views behind when he dons his black robes.
The best evidence of his work as a judge are his published opinions. They contain a few surprises and some ammunition - for both the left and the right.
For example, of the four abortion cases in which he participated as an appeals court judge, he voted on the pro-choice side in all but one. A 1995 Alito vote striking down a Pennsylvania abortion restriction in particular is raising eyebrows among some legal scholars.
More on the flip.
Now, is this conclusive evidence? Hardly. But it does raise the question--how can a judge with a record of upholding abortion laws be embraced as an anti-abortion judge? Not an anti-abortion person, mind you, but an anti-abortion judge.
Some of the sentiments I'm hearing around hear is that people are just spoiling for a supreme court fight, and want to go to the mattresses.
And I'm wondering if that's just what the Bush adminstration wants. A prolonged battle over Alito's nomination helps Bush by distracting the public and media from PlameGate.
I'm not by any means suggesting that we give Alito a free pass. When it comes to judicial appointments, the burden should be on the nominee to prove his/her qualifications, not on the Senate to prove lack of same. That's even more true given Bush's track record.
But let's dial the rhetoric back a bit. Look at the cases (and I mean, look at the actual decisions, not inflammatory reports of the decisions). Look at Alito's logic, look at his application of the law, and let's see what's there. At least we HAVE decisions to review; we didn't have that with Roberts.
The last thing we need to do right now is fight simply for the sake of picking a fight. If we do that, then we become the obstructionist that the Republicans claim we are.
OK, I've put on my flak jacket. Let me have it. :)