From
Kevin Drum:
Arlen Specter said today that he's looked at Samuel Alito's dissent in Casey and doesn't think it indicates that Alito would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. That's fine, I suppose, but it doesn't really matter much. After all, Specter's personal interpretation of Alito's opinions is just that: his personal interpretation.
On the other hand, Alito's personal interpretation obviously does mean something, and here's what Specter reported on that score:
The chairman said he had met with Alito for an hour and 15 minutes Monday and that the veteran appeals court judge assured him "he believes there is a right to privacy under the liberty clause of the United States Constitution" and "he accepts Griswold v. Connecticut as good law."....Alito also assured Specter that his view of legal precedent was that "the longer a decision was in effect and the more times it had been affirmed by different courts and different justices appointed by different presidents, it had extra precedential value."
As Kevin notes, not only is this Specter's version, even if ScAlito says it in the hearings, do you believe it? Thomas flat out lied under oath in his hearings. What is to stop Alito? It'll take a lot more than this.
But it will be interesting to see the Wingnut reaction to this immediate retreat by ScAlito.