Posted on 09/15/2005 5:41:13 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The nation's leading abortion business says it now opposes the nomination of John Roberts to become the next head of the Supreme Court. The abortion advocacy group says it believes Roberts would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade and would not support its policy of abortion without restrictions.
After three days of confirmation hearings, Roberts "still refuses to answer" whether he would vote to uphold Roe v. Wade, Karen Pearl, Planned Parenthood's interim president, said in an email alert to members.
"In light of this refusal to respond to direct questions about his commitment to [abortion], Planned Parenthood today announced its opposition to Roberts' confirmation as chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court," Pearl explained.
"We now firmly believe that his confirmation will jeopardize [abortion]— and he must be stopped," Pearl said.
The Planned Parenthood email instructs its members to contact senators and urge strong opposition to Roberts' nomination.
On the other hand, pro-life advocates are pleased with the way Roberts has answered questions about abortion.
Roberts has made sure he has not put himself in the position of not being able to participate in a case to reverse Roe by telling the Senate Judiciary Committee where he stands on the case. However, he laid out the groundwork for overturning the landmark decision by saying Supreme Court precedents can be overturned in various situations.
Cathy Cleaver Ruse, Family Research Council's Senior Legal Fellow and former Chief Counsel to the House Subcommittee on the Constitution, congratulated Roberts on his "masterful" performance.
"Specifically we were pleased with Judge Roberts' answers about Roe v. Wade," Ruse explained. "Judge Roberts refused to give hints or projections about how he might evaluate a future abortion case before the Court, but carefully stated what the law is on the matter of stare decisis and repeatedly pledged to follow the rule of law."
Some pro-life advocates worry that Roberts' discussion of stare decisis means he will vote to uphold Roe, but others point to a comment from Justice Clarence Thomas, who, in his dissent in the 1992 Casey decision, which upheld Roe, said the Supreme Court is well within its rights to overturn the controversial decision.
"We believe that Roe was wrongly decided, and that it can and should be overruled consistently with our traditional approach to stare decisis in constitutional cases," Thomas wrote.
Roberts' confirmation hearings continue today and the committee is expected to vote on Monday. Roberts will almost assuredly pass through committee on a party-line vote but a few Democrats may join Republicans in supporting him.
There's a real shocker.
... Duh...
If Planned Parenthood is against Roberts, then he must be a good choice.
That certainly is good news. Although I'll be surprised if Roberts votes to overturn.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Chucky Schumer was just on Oreilly's show...and I was shocked to hear him say that Roberts is probably the most brilliant man who has ever come before congress. He was actually complimenting him on his knowledge and how he never once even had to read from notes or consult with any of his advisors. BOre even had him squirming about voting for him.
But as Jeff Sessions (R-AL) pointed out in subsequent questioning (very effectively humiliating the PP president in the process), they also knee-jerkingly opposed Souter's nomination for the exact same reason -- Sessions even entered an anti-Souter flyer into the record. I think Roberts would love to at least chip away at Roe some more, but PP's opposition is not a guarantee of a good candidate. Sessions made the case quite convincingly that they would likely oppose any Republican-chosen nominee.
Even Scalia was confirmed 98-0. Even Schumer may bite his tongue and vote for him both in committee and on the floor, especially if he feels it will improve his chances at derailing the next nomination.
In twenty years, with any luck, we will evaluate what impact he has had on the court. If it manages not to declare itself unconstutional.
That's why the Judge is going to be Chief Justice and why the spy is never getting out of the can.
If Planned Parenthood is against him it definitely means I am for him.
No matter how Roberts judicial philosophy shakes out, his refusal to bow at the altar of PP or partake of its sacrament (abortion) speaks well of the man.
"Planned Parenthood Opposes John Roberts Supreme Court Nomination"
And the sun rises in the east.
You're supposed to say something REALLY original, like "Duh... they hate him so I love him!"
SO? Who cares? (not aimed at you, but at PP!)
Of course I read today that the feminists were against John Paul Stevens, Souter and Kennedy also...
Translation: We think this guy could threaten the gravy train.
We only like people who are as proud of having dead babies' blood on their hands as we are. Otherwise how are we supposed to know for sure if he wants to limit our right to the pursuit of happiness and to make a good living.
I don't think PP has anything to worry about with Roberts. "My faith and my religious beliefs do not play a role in my judging", Roberts told the Senate panel. So when he's on the job he'll assume the mindset of an atheist and save his Christian 'faith' for weekends. He also said the he believes that Roe v Wade has been settled as precedent.
As many will recall, JFK made the same pledge to help his election chances, and he kept his word. In the years following Kennedy's election school prayer was deemed illegal, birth control pills were introduced, and Christian symbols in public places began to fall to atheist's law suits. Kennedy never opposed any of it. My guess is that Roberts will also keep his word.
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.