Posted on 05/05/2009 9:19:44 AM PDT by Unam Sanctam
Is he pro-life or pro-choice? That was the giant unknown hanging in the balance one day in 1990 as President George H. W. Bush nominated a mystery man named David Souter for a Supreme Court seat. Both sides of the abortion issue badly wanted answers. I remember those debates, and especially the uncertainty.
America got its answer in 1992 in Casey v. Planned Parenthood, a seminal decision bearing the name of Pennsylvania’s pro-life Democrat governor. In that landmark case, Justice David Souter was the decisive swing vote in the narrow 5-4 majority, enshrining Roe v. Wade as law of the land.
Among those most euphoric over Souter’s vote were two liberal Senators from opposing parties: Senator Joe Biden (D-Del.) and Senator Warren Rudman (R-N.H.).
Rudman had pushed the Souter nomination. He ensured liberal colleagues that Souter was their guy. Rudman, a pro-choice Republican, had been Souter’s boss at the New Hampshire office of attorney general. He privately concluded that Souter would not vote against Roe. Rudman’s reasons, which he acknowledged only after he left the Senate, ranged from the legal to humanitarian: Given that Souter was “a compassionate human being,” averred Rudman, he would naturally support continued legalization of abortion—which has produced the deaths of over 40 million unborn babies since 1973.
But Rudman’s allies on the Democratic side weren’t so sure. And Rudman had to walk a fine line, since his pro-life president wanted a pro-life justice. So, Rudman quietly sought to assuage liberals. He urged them to trust him.
That silent trust was critical, since Souter’s position on abortion had to be dealt with stealthily. In fact, it was handled so delicately that the nominee’s true thinking was apparently unknown even to the White House.
Alas, with Casey v. Planned Parenthood, America had its answer, as Souter authorized the sanctity of Roe v. Wade.
As fate would have it, on that same day Senator Rudman and Senator Joe Biden bumped into each other at the train station, not in Washington, DC but in Wilmington, Delaware.
“At first, I didn’t see Joe; then I spotted him waving at me from far down the platform,” Rudman later recorded in his memoirs, Combat: Twelve Years in the U.S. Senate. “Joe had agonized over his vote for David, and I knew how thrilled he must be. We started running through the crowd toward each other, and when we met, we embraced, laughing and crying.”
An ecstatic Biden wept tears of joy, telling Rudman over and over: “You were right about him [Souter]! ... You were right!”
The two men were so jubilant, so giddy—practically dancing—that Rudman said onlookers thought they were crazy: “[B]ut we just kept laughing and yelling and hugging each other because sometimes, there are happy endings.”
It was sheer bliss: Roe v. Wade had been saved; it was alive. The two senators, liberal Democrat and liberal Republican, were so overcome that they sobbed. It was the most joyous moment.
Thanks to David Souter, Rudman celebrated: “The combined efforts of the Reagan and Bush administrations and the religious right to overthrow Roe had been defeated, probably for good.”
Well, not quite for good. A turning point arrived with the November 2008 presidential election. And that brings me to Justice Souter’s announcement last week.
Souter will be stepping down from the court. He made his announcement only days after another liberal Republican from the Northeast—Senator Arlen Specter—announced he was leaving the GOP for the Democratic Party, and, more significantly, just months after President George W. Bush, the son of the man who had nominated Souter, left the White House.
Pro-lifers and pro-choicers alike knew the 2008 election was utterly crucial to the future of Roe v. Wade. Literally, the legality of unrestricted abortion—plus its potential funding with your tax dollars—hinged on the next president. The contrast was unmistakable, given the remarkable pro-life views of the McCain-Palin ticket and the unprecedented pro-choice extremism of the Obama-Biden ticket. The next president would likely fill two U.S. Supreme Court vacancies: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens. David Souter’s name rarely surfaced.
Well, America chose Obama-Biden, including a near majority of American Protestants and a decisive majority of American Catholics. And last week, pro-choicers danced around their TVs when they learned about Souter. The justice surprised us all—again. He clearly had waited, silently again, for the second George Bush to get out of town.
Behold: there will be not just two high-court picks for Barack Obama but almost certainly three. Jackpot!
And, as fate would have it, shepherding the next nominee, aside President Obama, will be a still grinning Joe Biden—now elevated to the vice presidency. Biden is poised to again ensure yet more decades of Roe v. Wade, this time openly, and at new levels that even pro-choicers would have never imagined—and with Republicans unable to stop him. Biden can thank roughly 50 million Christians, including his fellow Catholics, for that ability.
It seems to me that Bush could have found out if Souder was pro-life or not by simply asking him. Any member of the Republican side of the Judiciary Committee could have done the same in the confirmation hearing. Why didn’t they?
“and I knew how thrilled he must be. We started running through the crowd toward each other, and when we met, we embraced, laughing and crying.”
Words can not express the contempt I feel for these two.
May God pay them back richly on judgment day.
Why don't lambs attack wolves?
Bush KNEW exactly what he was getting - a reliable liberal vote. You don’t believe he regrets his appointment of Souter, do you? NO President blindly makes an appointment to the highest court in the land. That’s why we have so many “surprises” when the Republicans make an appointment.
An ecstatic Biden wept tears of joy, telling Rudman over and over: “You were right about him [Souter]! ... You were right!”
The two men were so jubilant, so giddy—practically dancing—that Rudman said onlookers thought they were crazy: “[B]ut we just kept laughing and yelling and hugging each other because sometimes, there are happy endings.”
This is the creepiest thing I've ever read! How evil and heartless must you be to celebrate like this the murder of children??? These two disgust me. Especially Rudman...I hope there's a reserved seat for him in hell.
IMO, GHWB played a cynical and deceitful game of politics; nominating the known (to insiders) but stealth quantity in Souter for his first SCOTUS nominee, then going with the openly and honestly conservative Clarence Thomas for his second nominee, just before his 1992 reelection bid which he lost to Clinton.
I think pro-life was mostly a campaign position for the Bushes. "Stay out 'da Bushes."
The Bushes & the Klintoons pose somewhat differently but they are the same. Anyone elected via the corrupt "Two-Party Cartel" is a bought & paid for puppet to the elitists/leftists.
Abortion is the most divisive issue since slavery. The Culture of Death has a stranglehold on WashDC and pro-abortionists like Rudman and Biden are despicable creatures. Its gonna take an unwavering, traditional conservative candidate with the combined intestinal fortitude of Lincoln and Reagan to convince the people, its time to get rid of the abomination called Roe v Wade. Returning America to the Founders/Framers original Constitutional intent.
Worth repeating...
Republicans, yes Republicans have nominated the lberl SC justices. Ford nominated Stevens. Bush Souter, Reagan O’Conner. WE alowed Ginsburg in there without a whimper...
We have only ourselves to blame....
I predict that the nominee will be a woman, and one who is so far left it will make your head snap.
I remember that Souter was such a mystery, the Democrats started leaking hints that he was gay. He never married. He lived with his mother. All he cared about were books.
What a load of crap.
So true.
Lol, most everything I said is a known fact, except what GHWB's motives might or might not have been when he agreed to nominate Souter.
He either knew what to expect from Souter, or he allowed the wool to be pulled far down over his eyes.
“Why didn’t they?”
Because in those days, most Americans still believed in the independence of the judiciary. It was considered wrong and dishonorable to ask judges, in advance, to give assurances on how they would decide any given case. There were to be no “litmus tests.”
The Democrats have quietly destroyed all the unwritten rules that kept this country united and free and allowed for the peaceful transfer of power. This is just one of them. Others are, “Former presidents don’t criticize sitting presidents,” and “Politics ends at the water’s edge.”
That is exactly how I feel. Stone cold anger.
White was a Democrat and had been appointed by Kennedy, and he thought a Democratic President deserved to appoint his successor.
That may have been the wrong choice, but White had an integrity that so few justices have shown lately.
I'd have thought better of Souter if he'd practiced the same principle and given a Republican a chance to pick his successor.
Also, Potter Stewart was a moderate Republican appointed by Eisenhower who waited until Reagan was elected before stepping down.
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.