As predicted, the left is touting Judge Alito’s dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey as proof of his desire to undermine the Republic, of couse they mean Roe v. Wade. Read his dissent and Patterico’s primer.

Patterico points to a very interesting excerpt from the dissent:

Whether the legislature’s approach represents sound public policy is not a question for us to decide. Our task here is simply to decide whether Section 3209 meets constitutional standards.

Judge Alito makes a very good point that it is not for the courts to decide if something is wise or good, just if it is Constitutional. Sounds to me like we have our guy.

Meanwhile, just in case you are wondering if the law was wise or good, Instapundit makes a good argument here on why the husband should be notified (he is on the hook for child support if not aborted). He goes on to say:

So where's the husband's procreational autonomy? Did he give it up by getting married? And, if he did, is it unthinkable that when they get married women might give some of their autonomy up, too?
The problem here is that you can say "my body, my choice" -- but when you say, "my body, my choice but our responsibility," well, it loses some of its punch.

Not even 30 minutes and the blogosphere has good opinion pieces that are well thought out and backed up by research.

[Yakov]What a Country![/Yakov]

Update: Hubris, posting at INDC Journal, takes on another leftist talking point:

A reasonable person could disagree with Alito's position in Bray regarding what the plaintiff must show in order to defeat a summary judgment in favor of an employer in this specific type of discrimination case, but I do not see how a reasonable person could sum up his position as "Alito would allow race-based discrimination."

Key phrase: "reasonable person".