Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Samuel Alito: a good choice

If he's indeed worthy of his "Scalito" nickname, this was a good move. For President Bush, this was a very good move. For conservatives, this was a very good move. Alito's strength is that he wasn't everyone's first choice, but conservatives are rallying behind him.

Mark Levin likes him and respects him a great deal; they worked together for Ed Meese. Professor Bainbridge says that nominating Alito "is a solid pick that should unite the base behind it."

Michelle Malkin has a huge roundup of what bloggers and politicians are saying. The more Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Ted Kennedy and Howard Dean inveigh against Alito, the more I think Alito is a great pick.

Armando at DailyKos (I refuse to soil my blog by linking to such tripe) wrote:
And in 1986, Antonin Scalia was confirmed unanimously. That was then. This is now. We don't get a do over with Scalia. Democrats did not know that Scalia would be the most extreme, radical right wing Justice since the Four Horseman of the Lochner Era. If they did, they would have voted unanimously against him. Do the Republicans want to allow a recall? I know Democrats would love one.
And if Republicans had known Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer would be such extreme, radical left wing Supreme Court justices that they denied peaceful, law-abiding citizens the right to keep their own property, the Republican Senate would have voted unanimously against them.

So far, Alito's biggest judicial sin, according to the liberals, is his dissent on Planned Parenthood v. Casey. He simply believed it's not "unduly burdensome" to require a woman to inform her husband prior to getting an abortion. Jon Henke at QandO pointed out that Alito himself specified several exceptions, which I'd think would placate any reasonable person: the husband isn't the father, "he cannot be found after diligent effort," the pregnancy was from spousal sexual assault, and the woman fears her husband might harm her. Moreover, Alito also said there is no "veto power" granted to the husband -- only the right of notification.

I agree with Jon: whether you agree with the notification law or not, Alito addressed the case by the Constitution. This is a good sign. And via Professor Bainbridge, Larry Ribstein, before the nomination, indicated Alito's propensity "to enforce contracts as written." Now if he'll enforce the Constitution as written, meaning he's a "textualist"/strict constructionist a la Scalia and Thomas, we'll have a terrific Supreme Court justice.

McQ at QandO noted CBS correspondent John Roberts' professionalism. The latter oh-so-respectfully asked Scott McClellan, at a formal White House news conference, if Samuel Alito "is sloppy seconds, or what?"

Perhaps McClellan should have replied, "Like, whatever man. Next question. Yeah dude?"


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home