[kevkrom]

She has stated that the Supreme Court "has clearly held that the right to privacy guaranteed by the Constitution includes the right to have an abortion" and that "the law is settled in that regard."

IOW, a 5th Circuit judge doesn't have the authority to overrule the USSC. What's the problem here?

[SoFloFreeper]

Yes, I see it the same way, essentially. Roe v. Wade's perversion of the Constitution can be undone by the death of 1000 cuts: bit by bit, taking away its effect by enforcing (rightfully) the state laws that diminish Roe's power.

[proud American in Canada]

IOW, a 5th Circuit judge doesn't have the authority to overrule the USSC. What's the problem here?

Thank you for this rational post.

[Always Right]

IOW, a 5th Circuit judge doesn't have the authority to overrule the USSC. What's the problem here?

Well, it doesn't give us a warm fuzzy. Technically her statement is correct from the perspective of a circuit court judge. Maybe her answer was to appease Democrats drilling her. But then again, she does not have a record that indicates, so the question still lingers on where she stands on many conservative issues. From what all I have heard she is brilliant.

[Willie Green]

IOW, a 5th Circuit judge doesn't have the authority to overrule the USSC. What's the problem here?

If lower court judges won't challenge previous SCOTUS decisions,
then the SCOTUS will never have an opportunity to review and correct its previous errors.

THAT's the problem here.

[Texas Federalist]

IOW, a 5th Circuit judge doesn't have the authority to overrule the USSC. What's the problem here?

Right, but Garza felt compelled, when the issue arose, to follow Roe v. Wade while criticizing it in an opinion. If Clement was strongly anti-Roe, she could have qualified her comment.

[Trust but Verify]

The context in which she said that is important. A Circuit Court does not have the authority to overrule the USSC. I guess we only hate activist judges when they're liberals.