Posted on 07/11/2018 7:40:39 AM PDT by Morgana
Yale Law School students and faculty wrote and signed an open-letter to the dean Tuesday, criticizing Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court and saying that “people will die if he is confirmed.”
The authors and signers of the letter asked Yale Law School Dean Heather K. Gerken to “use your authority and platform to expose the stakes of this moment and the threat that Judge Kavanaugh poses.”
“[P]eople will die if he is confirmed,” the letter reads, adding that he is a “threat to our democracy.” The crux of the letter is a disavowal for the potential overturning of Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion nationwide in 1973.
“Since his campaign launched, Trump has repeatedly promised to appoint justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade,” the authors added. “Overturning that decision would endanger the lives of countless people who need or may need abortions — including many who sign this letter.”
Kavanaugh, a Yale Law School alumni, is a staunch opponent to abortion and opponents have expressed concern that his presence on the Supreme Court could make overturning Roe v. Wade possible.
The authors of the letterallege that as a judge, Kavanaugh denied a “detained immigrant minor her constitutional right to abortion,” referencing Kavanaugh’s vote against allowing a 17-year-old illegal immigrant to get an abortion while in government custody. Ultimately, the teen was allowed to have the abortion, The Daily Caller reported.
Kavanaugh’s nomination “is a political choice about the meaning of the constitution and our vision of democracy, a choice with real consequences for real people,” the letter states. “Without a doubt, Judge Kavanaugh is a threat to the most vulnerable. He is a threat to many of us, despite the privilege bestowed by our education, simply because of who we are.”
Gregg Gonsalves, an associate professor (adjunct) of law and co-director of the Global Health Justice Partnership, was among Yale faculty that signed the letter. Gonsalves retweetedthe letter on Tuesday after highlighting problems he saw with a Justice Kavanaugh.
Gonsalves lashed out on Tuesday against Yale’s statement on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination, writing on Twitterthat it “praises his reasoning & scholarship even though the man’s intent is to destroy the legacy–on the ACA, LGBT rights–of those very faculty who praise him.”
Gerken wrote a letter Monday praising President Donald Trump’s nomination of Kavanaugh, saying that she can “personally attest that, in addition to his government and judicial service, Judge Kavanaugh has been a longtime friend to many of us in the Yale Law School community.”
“I have known Brett Kavanaugh for many years,” Gerken said. “Ever since I joined the faculty, I have admired him for serving as a teacher and mentor to our students and for hiring a diverse set of clerks, in all respects, during his time on the court.”
Another Yale law professor praised Kavanaugh.
“Judge Kavanaugh is more of a originalist and that’s not a bad thing,” said Akhil Reed Amar, a professor at Yale Law School. “That is something that actually — I got my constitution here — who cares a lot especially about the text and the original history and understanding of the Constitution.”
On his own ? LOL
““Judge Kavanaugh is more of a originalist and that’s not a bad thing,” said Akhil Reed Amar, a professor at Yale Law School.”
Said EX-PROFESSOR at Yale
That’s funny stuff. But abortion is not funny.
These folks don’t realize how court cases have to run the course up to the Supremes. And once they get there, the Roberts court half the time will punt back to the states for revision or closure.
“People will die”
The irony of their thought process escapes them.
“And once they get there, the Roberts court half the time will punt back to the states for revision or closure.”
Probably the best thing about Robert’s court. He is demanding lower courts take responsibility rather than pass the book to SCOTUS.
anti-science, anti-technology commie leftist speak again.
Women had abortions pre-1960s because 1) birth control was not always effective 2) issues with being a single unwed mother.
Science and technology have made birth control very effective and every inexpensive. Except in rare cases where the mother’s health is in crisis, abortion today is used as birth control and should be banned.
If a woman doesn’t want to be pregnant, it is really easy. Don’t have sex, use an effective birth control.
If abortions were banned today (except of valid health crisis), any woman seeking a convenience abortion is a moron and should be prosecuted.
Dear Yale students,
You don’t have a democracy, and never did.
How is Kavanaugh a threat to any of them?? They are already living!
THEY WANT Babies TO DIE having their brains sucked out of a hole CUT in their heads...............
If Roe were to be overturned, all that would do is return the question of abortion to the states. At least ten states would continue the practice of rampant abortion (CA, OR, WA, NM, IL, NY, CT, MA, VT, HI). Of the remaining forty states, some would outlaw abortion, some would restrict abortion, a few might continue to allow all abortion, most would allow "Plan B" abortion.
In those states that outlaw abortion or greatly restrict it, Planned Parenthood-type companies will run a kind of underground railroad funneling pregnant women into states that continue to allow abortion, so that the overall number of abortions is unlikely to decrease significantly.
Roe should be overturned because it is bad law, the way Dred Scott and Plessy were bad law. But only useful idiots on the left believe that overturning Roe will turn America into a low-abortion society. For that to happen would require something that the left fears far more than Kavanaugh: a Third Great Awakening and a national return to Christ in particular and Judeo-Christian ethics in general.
So, Yale and Harvard professors are no longer teaching either logic or law to their students?
This my shocked face.
Could any of these fools explain the basis for the Roe v Wade decision?
Because science has since proven conclusively that the life that is ended by abortion is human and is not the body of the woman because the DNA differs.
Therefore, the privacy that Roe v Wade determined was the reason abortion can not be forbidden means that murder is being allowed because it’s being done in private.
Couldn’t that reason be developed into a case that you can murder someone in your home because . . . privacy?
And there is the insanity, fully exposed.
Or an amendment to the constitution declaring that life begins at conception. Of course that has about a snow balls chance in hell of ever passing.
Sounds like a threat.
Over 60 million already have since Roe v. Wade.
50% of the people who enter an abortion clinic die. That is the purpose of abortion.
Roe v. Wade will not end if a case doesn't make it to the SCOTUS.
These people are insane. The left raised them to be that way.
Much in that same manner as their asinine lie concerning grandmothers being thrown off a cliff......
Continued libtard and progressive fearmongering and utter idiocy....a cancer beyond cancer that will ultimately wreck this country..........
They are total drama queens!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.