Square Peg / Round Hole Alert!
Posted on 03/03/2006 10:52:07 AM PST by Graybeard58
The last time we checked, newly appointed Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito had not been seen slipping into telephone booths and emerging in a blue body suit with a big red "S" on his chest. But that hasn't stopped anti-abortion leaders from attributing superhuman powers to him.
Justice Alito is seen as the fabled fifth conservative vote on the high court, joining justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy and Chief Justice John Roberts, also a newcomer. It's understandable pro-lifers would feel this way. Pro-choice forces flavored the Roberts and Alito nomination seasons with stark warnings the two men would overturn Roe vs. Wade, the landmark 1973 abortion-rights ruling.
Viewed superficially, recent events seem to confirm that thesis. The Supreme Court this week ruled federal laws against racketeering could not be used against abortion-clinic protesters. The tactic of using the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) law was intended to bankrupt and intimidate pro-life groups.
The ruling does not lift a 1995 injunction against Connecticut anti-abortion organizations. This injunction was based in part on state anti-trespassing laws. Nor is there an indication of a sea change in the court: The vote was 8-0, with Justice Alito abstaining. But the impact could be huge because of attorneys' compensation requirements.
Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue, predicted the National Organization for Women, the loser in the RICO case, will "pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to the attorneys of the pro-lifers for the expenses incurred in these abusive and groundless lawsuits." But the compensation sword cuts both ways. "Federal law requires that attorney's fees be paid by the states to the attorneys for abortion clinics when they 'prevail' in abortion cases," explained Clarke D. Forsythe, of Americans United for Life, in a December 2004 National Review Online commentary.
It is for this reason the other big news on the abortion front -- proposed laws in South Dakota and Mississippi that would all but outlaw abortion in those states -- promises to be a costly obstacle to the widely supported goal of further reducing abortion rates.
Foreseeing such bills emerging in "red" states more than a year ago, Mr. Forsythe noted courts assuredly will strike them down, establishing new precedents that may be difficult to overturn. And there is no guarantee the Supreme Court would agree to hear these cases or that five justices would embrace the epochal step of overturning Roe. By focusing on partial-birth-abortion bans and other measures that actually have a chance of becoming law, however, pro-life activists can make a real dent in the incidence of abortion.
"Bills prohibiting abortion ... will do nothing more than fund the ACLU and Planned Parenthood, keeping them fully employed, paid by tax dollars, for years," Mr. Forsythe concluded. "The states might as well skip the litigation and just mail them a check."
The presumed anti-Roe position of Justice Alito notwithstanding, the South Dakota proposal has symbolic value at best. The price, in legal-defense dollars and in the inevitable distraction from more promising pro-life causes, would be unacceptably high.
It's stil beyond me why it's so important for Libs to have the right to kill the unborn.
Square Peg / Round Hole Alert!
The Editor of this particular newspaper is as conservative as they come and also pro life.
He's making a point that the new laws being passed will not stand and that attornies for the ACLU will be paid with tax payer's money when the laws are successfully challenged.
1. RICO was not just a pro-life victory. Using RICO on abortion protestors was both an abuse of the RICO statutes and a free-speech violation. Even uber-liberal Ruth "Buzzy" Ginsburg understands this. Liberal groups such as unions were on the same side as the pro-lifers because if RICO was used on clinic protestors then it could be used on pickett lines as well.
2. Justice Kennedy a conservative???!!?? LOLOLOL!!
3. Clarke D. Forsythe, of Americans United for Life, made his comments over a year ago, long before South Dakota initiated their most recent bill. The editor is trying to connect his past statement with recent events. Note that there was no effort to get a recent opinion from Mr. Forsythe.
4. In any case, Mr. Forsythe's comments seems to be more concerned which group of lawyers will get paid.
4. Recent medical advances justify this court challenge. Planned Parenthood vs. Casey has paved the way for another thorough review of infantcide. By the time this makes it to the USSC, liberal Justice Stevens will be 6 feet under.
With their RELATIVE MORALITY they see it as a women's issue to decide on what she does with her body. She CAN take her fetus to a live birth; she CAN take her fetus to live birth, then have it killed; she CAN kill her fetus at any given time before birth.
If liberals REALLY thought of the horror and evil of killing the unborn, they wouldn't do it. For them, it's pure compartmentalization, rationalization, excusing self from wrongdoing by lying, that is, RELATIVE MORALITY.
People do it all the time with cheating on their income tax, breaking driving laws, ignoring drug/drinking laws, cheating on tests (civil service, school, driving), committing adultery, you name it. One excuse: "Bad laws are made to be broken." That was one of the more stupid mantras from the 60's.
Mostly, people just say "Yeah, but...." as their excuse.
MOST cheating/self-lying is small potatoes compared to abortion-on-demand. THAT is simply legalized murder available to any/all women in this country.
They've killed MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of Americans already. They are right in there with all the terrorists. In fact, they have SURPASSED all the terrorists and are moving into the arena of killing tyrants (Mao being the number one killer).
Good points.
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.