And in Guiliani's tortured logic, a "strict constructionist" could just as easily uphold Roe v. Wade as overturn it. That has to make you wonder what he thinks the term "strict constructionist" means.
“And in Guiliani’s tortured logic, a ‘strict constructionist’ could just as easily uphold Roe v. Wade as overturn it. That has to make you wonder what he thinks the term ‘strict constructionist’ means.”
If Rudy’s logic is tortured, so was Alito’s and Roberts’ before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Both justices claimed strict constructionism implied a decision that could go either way—either to reverse Roe vs. Wade or to uphold it because of already long-established precedence. Neither would tip his hand before the Senate as to how he would vote. Rudy’s position is exactly the same the WH itself uses to coach its nominees to get them by the Committee.