Chuck Schumer likes to say he is against judicial activism. He has also said that Sandra Day O'Connor's replacement should be of a similar persuasion as her. So he should like Samuel Alito's ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Patterico has a good overview of the case.

First, Alito embodied the definition of judicial restraint, which Schumer says he likes. Alito refused to overrule the democratically elected branch of government and use judicial imperialism to impose his own will.

Whether the legislature's approach represents sound public policy is not a question for us to decide...We have no authority to overrule that legislative judgment even if we deem it "unwise" or worse.

That does not sound like activism to me, so Schumer should be happy.

Furthermore, Alito explicitly relied on O'Connor's abortion rulings in his own opinion.

Taken together, Justice O'Connor's opinions reveal that an undue burden does not exist unless a law (a) prohibits abortion or gives another person the authority to veto an abortion or (b) has the practical effect of imposing "severe limitations," rather than simply inhibiting abortions "'to some degree'" or inhibiting "some women."

All in all, with his deference to the legislature (judicial restraint) and invocation of Justice O'Connor, Samuel Alito's Casey ruling should make Chuck Schumer quite happy.

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/majority.cgi/2419

---

Name:

Email Address:

URL:
Remember Me? YesNo

What is the Vice-President's last name?

(NOTE: You must get this correct, otherwise, your comment will be rejected.)

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)