ALITO: A DEATH REGULATOR

http://www.covenantnews.com/abortion/archives/015986.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-10-31-alito-usat-analysis_x.htm

Federal Judge Samuel Alito: A Death Regulator

As Federal Appetite Judge, Alito's Record Shows He Supports Killing Babies After 'Husband-Notification'

WASHINGTON -- When Samuel Alito had considered Pennsylvania's spousal notification law, he wrote that it did not put a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking to end a pregnancy. He said it "merely requires a married woman desiring an abortion to certify that she has notified her husband." He said the state Legislature could have reasonably concluded that the law furthered "a husband's interests in the fetus." Alito, taking a narrower view of Supreme Court abortion precedents than his colleagues, also emphasized that the requirement would not have great practical effect because the overwhelming number of abortions in America are sought by unmarried women. When the Supreme Court rejected that view, it said the focus should be on the women who would fall under the husband-notification requirement, not those who would not. The majority stressed that state regulation of abortion has a greater impact on the pregnant woman's liberty than it does on a husband's interests.

USA Today photo caption: {{ Judge Samuel Alito's reputation as a jurist who opposes abortion is built largely on his decision in one case. }}

TG: And that ONE case is a crock, as we are seeing.

{{ Alito — unlike Bush's first two high court nominees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Harriet Miers — also has a record on abortion }}

TG: What? Just yesterday a news source was crowing that Alito had an extensive paper trail like Roberts (and unlike Miers). Now they are saying Roberts didn't have as much of a paper trail. Which will it be tomorrow?

{{ Alito's record on abortion is not uniformly against such rights. In a 2000 decision, he cited Supreme Court precedent in voting against a New Jersey ban on a procedure that critics call "partial-birth" abortion. Alito emphasized that the appeals court was bound by an earlier Supreme Court ruling that struck down Nebraska's ban on the procedure because the law was vaguely written and lacked an exception for when the procedure is necessary to protect a woman's health. }}

TG: Had Alito opposed the NJ PBA ban on the grounds that it might have recognized other forms of abortion as legitimate (like Bush's federal PBA ban did), I could not hold him at fault, but that's not the case. He clearly is in favor of various exceptions where abortion should be allowed - including the HEALTH of the mother. That's much different from an exception for the LIFE of the mother - but most people look right past that. Exceptions for the life of the mother are also unnecessary, but at least those would truly be limited. ANY pregnancy has some health risks, so to appeal to a HEALTH exception is to take a 100% PRO-ABORTION position in principle.

So some might say that Alito is pro-life with exceptions, which would be the same thing as saying he was pro-abortion with exceptions. But with the 'health' exception, in principle he is 100% pro-abortion. Any woman who gets sick (or might get sick) from her pregnancy is eligible to kill her baby, according to Alito's exception.

Pro-aborts screamed for an exception for the LIFE of the mother. That sounded reasonable to conservative Christians so they allowed for it. Then the pro-death crowd slyly substituted the word 'health' for 'life' and has us arguing on their terms and has professed pro-lifers supporting 100% abortion via the health exception.