{"id":1917,"date":"2005-11-01T10:00:46","date_gmt":"2005-11-01T17:00:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.amptoons.com\/blog\/?p=1917"},"modified":"2005-11-01T10:00:46","modified_gmt":"2005-11-01T17:00:46","slug":"samuel-alito","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/?p=1917","title":{"rendered":"Samuel Alito"},"content":{"rendered":"

Or “Scalito,” “Scalia’s Mini-Me,” or even “Strip Search Sammy” as I’ve seen some<\/a><\/strong> lefty<\/a><\/strong>, pro-choice<\/a><\/strong>, and feminist<\/a><\/strong> bloggers describe Bush’s latest SCOTUS nominee<\/strong><\/a>. Needless to say, it didn’t take long for groups such as NARAL Pro-Choice America<\/em> and Planned Parenthood<\/em> to hit my inbox with snippets from Alito’s judicial record.<\/p>\n

Via NARAL Pro-Choice America<\/a><\/strong>….<\/p>\n

Alito took pains to distant himself from the longstanding constitutional requirement that abortion restrictions must have exceptions when a woman’s health is in jeopardy. He did so when ruling on a law that effectively banned abortion as early as the 12th week of pregnancy and lacked an exception to protect women’s health. The health exception is a fundamental tenet of Roe v. Wade, and the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments about the need for the health exception this fall.[…]<\/p>\n

Alito has argued that significant restrictions on a woman’s right to choose are constitutional. In Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, Alito argued that all of the proposed law’s restrictions on a woman’s right to choose “\u201c including a spousal notification provision struck down by the Third Circuit and, later, the Supreme Court “\u201c were constitutional. Alito dissented in part because he would have gone even further than the rest of the court.<\/p>\n

Alito would uphold state laws that place significant roadblocks in the way of women seeking abortion care. Alito concurred with the majority’s opinion in Casey that concluded that “time delay, higher cost, reduced availability, and forcing the woman to receive information she has not sought,”\u009d although admittedly “potential burdens,”\u009d could not “be characterized as an undue burden.”\u009d This opinion practically ensures that he would never find any burden to be undue.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

From Planned Parenthood<\/a><\/strong>….<\/p>\n

[…]In Planned Parenthood of Central New Jersey v. Farmer, the Third Circuit was asked to rule on an abortion regulation that did not contain a valid health exception for the life of the woman. Alito grudgingly applied the Supreme Court precedents in both Roe v. Wade and Stenberg v. Carhart to overturn the statute while refusing to endorse the reasoning of the Supreme Court in either case.[…]<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court’s decision to hear Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood at the end of November spotlights the urgency of the threat to reproductive freedom. In this high-stakes case, the justices are expected to rule on whether a woman’s health will remain the paramount concern in laws that restrict abortion access. The ruling may have an immediate impact on women’s health across the nation and will determine whether a fundamental principle established in Roe v. Wade will remain the law of the land. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And SaveTheCourt.Org has a collection of reactions from some of the far-Rightwing leaders<\/a><\/strong> such as Dobson and Pat Robertson. Also Feministe<\/a><\/strong> has a few good posts<\/a><\/strong> on “Scalito,<\/a>“<\/strong> and so do Pandagon’s<\/a><\/strong> bloggers<\/a><\/strong>. Ugh…it didn’t take long for Dubya to whip this guy out on us, did it? Like my weekend and Monday morning weren’t depressing enough.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Or “Scalito,” “Scalia’s Mini-Me,” or even “Strip Search Sammy” as I’ve seen some lefty, pro-choice, and feminist bloggers describe Bush’s latest SCOTUS nominee. Needless to say, it didn’t take long for groups such as NARAL Pro-Choice America and Planned Parenthood … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":13,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,102,111],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1917","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-abortion-reproductive-rights","category-conservative-zaniness-right-wingers-etc","category-supreme-court-issues"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1917","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/13"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1917"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1917\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1917"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1917"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1917"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}