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.”

Looking at previous restrictions that Justice O’Connor had approved, which “almost certainly were substantial enough to dissuade some women from obtaining abortions,” Judge Alito wrote that “it appears clear that an undue burden may not be established simply by showing that a law will have a heavy impact on a few women but that instead a broader inhibiting effect must be shown.”

A number of liberal sources are in full "screaming bloody murder" mode over this guy. I don't get it. I don't see the fire. This is not Janice Rogers Brown.

I don't think the above line of reasoning in unreasonable, for the exact same reason I don't think the 9th circuit was being unreasonable when they struck the pledge requirement. These guys are responsible for applying precident. They are not responsible for reaching the outcome you'd prefer. If you don't like the outcome, you should pressure the legislature unless you can demonstrate that the judge is unreasonable. I haven't seen one commentator argue that his reasoning is flawed or unprofessional. They seem focused on results, not how they were reached, and that seems like so much political bullshit.

If the left really has a problem with this guy they are going to have to provide an explanation that has meat. Until such time my official position on this nomination is: "Did you expect a Republican controlled government to nominate a liberal?"

Patterico’s Pontifications - Alito’s Dissent in Casey