Alito - LA Times Article

It doesn't come up well on the website, but the LA Times article on Alioto sure made him seem like a likeable guy.

It's odd - people are going to point to this abortion dissent he made. The issue: prior to getting an abortion, a women would need to provide a signed statement that she had informed her spouse of getting the abortion. The court said this was an undue burden on the wife. Alito dissented.

I'm a pretty pro-choice guy, but at the same time I'm not the type of liberal who is losing sleep over the possibility of the court overturning Roe. I still think abortion would be legal in most states. And I believe this issue of informing the husband is cloudy at best. As a man, I would want to know if I impregnated someone and she was going to get an abortion. I wouldn't presume to have any "veto" power over the woman, but it seems to me, I ought to know about it. I dunno, this is a weird one for me.

In the end, with all this Supreme Court business, I trust smart, rationale people to make sound decisions regardless of ideology. I think the law has sufficient checks and balances and overall is a system that works quite well. I don't see myself getting into a big fuss over this nomination. A liberal democrat who worked with him voices support.

Money quote: "Of course, Alito would not have been on John Kerry's or any other Democrat's short list for the Supreme Court. But, as we all know, John Kerry didn't win in 2004, nor did the Democrats capture a majority in the Senate. Given that reality, Pringle said, "I'd rather have someone who has real intellectual ability, who has experience, who has a history of making these kinds of difficult decisions, and who has demonstrated respect for the Court as an institution, than a stealth candidate." "

And jeez, it's not really like I disagree with this decision either, although he'll be chastised for liberals for it.