Prof Bainbridge has a great point by point take down of the New York Times editorial about Alito.

He points out the omitted pieces of the story about abortion, presidential power, congressional power, and one person one vote. Here’s a sample, go read the whole thing here.

The NY Times says:

• ABORTION Judge Alito has not only opposed Roe v. Wade, he has also worked to overturn it. When he applied for a promotion in the Reagan administration in 1985, he wrote that he was “particularly proud” of his legal arguments “that the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion.” In meetings with senators, Judge Alito has talked about his respect for Roe, but he has said nothing to discourage his supporters on the religious right who back him because they believe he will vote to overturn it. The American people have a right to know, unambiguously, where Judge Alito stands on Roe.

Here’s what the NY Times didn’t tell you:

• “Samuel Alito supported limited abortion rights in 3 out of 4 rulings ….” - Wikipedia
• “What is remarkable in both cases is that Judge Alito recommended against taking the position that more senior, politically appointed officials were urging the solicitor general to take before the court. In the abortion case, not only the head of the civil division but also other high-ranking officials were urging that I, as the solicitor general at the time, ask the court to overturn Roe v. Wade. The bottom line of Judge Alito’s memo was that I should not do that.” - Charles Fried, former Solicitor General and Alito’s former boss

AnalPhilosopher has more on the same editorial. And so does Ann Althouse.