Alito's dissenting opinion in the 1991 Planned Parenthood v. Casey appeals court decision noted that Pennsylvania lawmakers were within their rights in requiring married women to tell their husbands before aborting their children. "It's amazing how pro-abortion advocates have railed against Alito for stating that even such a minor restriction of their extreme abortion-on-demand agenda should be constitutionally permitted," said Mrs. Brown.
Planned Parenthood's Karen Pearl, for instance, said confirming Alito "would radically transform the Supreme Court and create a direct threat to the health and safety of American women." People for the American Way's Ralph Neas commented that Alito "would threaten Americans' rights and legal protections for decades."
"It speaks volumes to me that abortion advocates reacted instantly with such shrill hyperbole," said Mrs. Brown. "All I have read about Judge Alito thus far shows he is a decent man and an experienced, even-handed jurist whom senators should support. It would be grossly unfair of pro-abortion members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to impose a litmus test on Judge Alito based on either his position on abortion or his faith. I trust that he will receive an honest hearing on Capitol Hill, and speedy confirmation as an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court."
Release issued: 1 Nov 05