More on the Personal Beliefs of Judges

From today's Detroit News:

Judicial philosophy makes Alito fit for Supreme Court

Bernard Dobranski, founding dean and president of Ave Maria School of Law in Ann Arbor: The most misleading criticism of Samuel Alito is the insistence that he explain his personal beliefs on abortion and related issues.
That really distorts what the nature of judging is. Because we have become so polarized as a society, it is particularly important to see how judges judge. The Democrats don't ask about that. They want to know how Alito would vote on Roe v. Wade.
I'm not concerned about a judge's personal views. I'm concerned about whether the judge can put those aside and interpret the statutes and Constitution appropriately. Judge Alito does.
Back in 1987, there was some debate after Robert Bork withdrew as a Supreme Court nominee about whether to nominate Laurence Silberman, then a judge on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. The pro-life lobby didn't know how he personally stood on the issue, but they knew eventual Reagan court nominee Anthony Kennedy was personally anti-abortion.
What we have seen is that view didn't factor into how Kennedy handled the abortion issue, much to the dismay of the pro-life lobby.
Now, there's nothing in the Constitution that can be interpreted to show there is a right to privacy that protects abortion. But you can't be certain how judges will respect precedents or come out on certain cases.