Samuel Alito's 90-year-old mother says:

The plain simple fact is that Alito voted in favor of partial birth abortion as a fundamental right. We don’t need to go any further than that. It doesn’t matter why or how. There can be and is no good excuse or reason for doing so. Ever. And there is no explaining it away.

Now, some will try to say that he was compelled to do it. In the face of all logic and simple human decency, and despite the fact that the oath he swore was to uphold the Constitution, which is more than Supreme Court precedent and which does not say that murder is a right, they say that he was forced to stand on the side of the butchers because the Supreme Court made him do it. Just like the judges in antebellum America were forced to return fugitive slaves, just like judges in 1930s Germany were forced to sterilize Jews and send them to concentration camps, because a bunch of judges above them (who think themselves to be “the law,”) said so, that is, they were just "following orders," notwithstanding the fact that all human decency cries out against it.

But the fact is that it is quite apparent that in Planned Parenthood v. Farmer he didn’t even try to distinguish the N.J. case from Stenberg. He made no attempt to find a way to uphold the N.J. partial birth abortion law. He even rejected a request that the N.J. state courts be allowed to interpret the N.J. law before he struck it down. He made no analysis of the issue at all — he simply summarily, casually, and coldly upheld partial birth abortion as a fundamental right.

And he certainly was not forced to rule that unborn “human beings” are not included within the meaning of “person” contained in the Fourteenth Amendment. The Alexander v. Whitman case had nothing to do with abortion, it was about wrongful death actions, which does not require application of abortion law, which is sui generis. Why the hell else do we permit murder charges for at attack on a pregnant woman that results in the death of the unborn child?

We cannot turn a blind eye to this. We cannot, once again, simply hope and pray and cross our fingers. And like those “intellectual superiors” at NRO so recently taught us, we should not be forced to simply trust that he will do the right thing. Anyone who can ever vote in favor of partial birth abortion — for any reason whatsoever — anyone who can allow himself to be personally involved in abortion, who can cooperate with and participate in such evil, as he did, is disqualified from sitting on the Supreme Court and is not qualified to sit on any court anywhere, even if he does have a fancy degree from an Ivy League school — and especially if he calls himself a Catholic. The Doctrinal Note is clear and authoritative -- no Catholic in public life (which would include judges) can ever cooperate with, or in any way support or acquiesce in, the evil of abortion.

The Farmer concurrence is indefensible. After that decision, there is nothing that can ever make him acceptable.

Scalito? Ha. He gives every appearance of being Cuomito — “personally opposed, but” bound by his judicial conservatism to give respect to stare decisis and uphold Roe and Casey. There is absolutely no evidence that he will overrule them. In fact, he gives every indication that he will reaffirm them. Certainly, his decisions until now have shown that it does not violate or bother his conscience one bit to strike down abortion laws and permit the butchery to continue.

Planned Parenthood v. Farmer (partial birth abortion) –
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=3rd&navby=case&no=995272
Alexander v. Whitman (personhood of unborn human beings) –
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=3rd&navby=case&no=971597p