NO MIDDLE GROUND

THE POLTICS OF DIVISION battalion rolls on as Bush Supreme Court nominee is now revealed to be firmly against Roe, at least in everything he has written back in the Eighties. Cook Political [pdf] reports the country 48 percent pro choice and 46 percent pro life. With his push of Alito, Bush clearly wants to run the plurality for choice into the ground.  Rather than “frontal assault,” the Reagan era Alito counseled another direction.  The White House attempt to cast him as open on issues before the court like Roe now seems like misdirection. Here’s the WaPo take

In a memo disclosed yesterday that he wrote in 1985 as an assistant to the solicitor general, Alito recommended that the administration submit a brief to the Supreme Court, asking it to uphold a Pennsylvania law that imposed a variety of abortion restrictions and "make clear that we disagree with Roe v. Wade ."
Alito argued in the 17-page document that stepping into the case, Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists , would be a more effective strategy for President Ronald Reagan than a "frontal assault" on the landmark case and would not "even tacitly concede Roe 's legitimacy." Disagreeing with the administration's position, the court struck down the Pennsylvania law the following year.

COULD IT BE more clear where Alito would stand if he were to sit on the highest bench in the land?  MESSAGE TO DEMS:  Pull your heads out of the um clouds.  It’s time to show up, to enter the middle ground and take a side.  Bush clearly has with Alito.

MITIGATING EFFECTS Alito in many ways counseled an old, some would say wise course of political battle.  Fight on the ground where you might win.  Some skirmishes on abortion rights might have the effect of winning a larger battle.  The AP take reports

Alito wrote in the memo, released by the National Archives on Wednesday, that “no one seriously believes that the court is about to overrule Roe v. Wade.”
But, he said, “By taking these cases, the court may be signaling an inclination to cut back. What can be made of this opportunity to advance the goals of bringing about the eventual overruling of Roe v. Wade and, in the meantime, of mitigating its effects?”

ON THE COURT Alito would have the power not merely to mitigate Roe, but be a voice to reverse it.  His voice on this will be hard to disguise.

RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL READING  Parental notification for minors having abortions in New Hampshire is the most current ground of battle. 
DO THE PARENTS KNOW?  The New Hampshire attorney general asked the Supreme Court today to restore her state's abortion law, and in so doing she encountered sharp questions about a facet of the statute's requirement that doctors notify a pregnant teen-ager's parent before performing an abortion.
ROBERTS SEEKS MIDDLE GROUND   "What's supposed to happen?" asked Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who posed the hypothetical situation during oral arguments at the Supreme Court yesterday. The dilemma, probably rare but undeniably dramatic, defines the most significant case on abortion rights to reach the court in half a decade. The basic right to abortion, recognized by the court 32 years ago in Roe v. Wade , is not at stake, but the scope of the right may be.

OTHER VOICES IN THE SOUND AND FURY 
Alito + Roe v. Wade =   Feministe    Betsy’ s Page

MUST READS Lithwick in Slate Kelly Ayotte, the New Hampshire attorney general, defends her state's parental notification statute. In her opening sentence, Ayotte characterizes a minor who might seek an abortion as a "child." Just so you know where her head is at. 
RELATED and to the point: Applied Illogic.