Posted on 11/08/2006 2:26:48 PM PST by NinoFan
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, proceeding calmly, cautiously and analytically, left the clear impression on Wednesday that his vote may be available to strike down Congress' first attempt to impose a nationwide ban on an abortion procedure -- even though the procedure at issue is one that Kennedy has suggested is morally repugnant. In two hours of argument on abortion procedures, overwhelmingly dominated by analysis of medical procedures and barely touching basic separation-of-powers questions, Kennedy dropped suggestive hints one after the other that he is troubled by what Congress attempted in the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.
His vote -- potentially decisive because four Justices who had voted in 2000 to strike down a somewhat similar state ban seemed unlikely to find the federal ban to be different in a constitutionally significant way -- very likely will depend in the end on how opinions are drafted and negotiated along the way toward decisions in the cases of Gonzales v. Carhart (05-380) and Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood (05-1382). But, at least during oral argument, Kennedy seemed unpersuaded that Congress either had succeeded in making its ban narrow enough to be upheld without disturbing the core right to abortion, or that, if upheld as written, it could ever be challenged at a time when such a ban would genuinely threaten the health of pregnant women seeking abortions.
(Excerpt) Read more at scotusblog.com ...
My God, do our conservative justices never stand up for what's right?
Just a few years ago, Kennedy vigorously dissented to the original decision striking down the PBA.
Here's a guy who's "disturbed" by what Congress did, but not apparently disturbed by this atrocious abortion procedure.
I sure hope so.
But I hate to say it, Kennedy is a bloody weathervane. He wants to be popular, he wants to be praised on the cocktail circuit. Now that the anti-abortion initiative in S Dakota has been shot down, and a bunch of pro-abortion congressman have been elected, he may turn his coat again.
What are the chances of any more Roberts or Alito type appointments to the court now? I'd say about zero. Stephens can safely step down now, no fear of a conservative appointment.
Well, that's what this analysis is saying. Kennedy appears to be ready to turn again, so I hope he does NOT do that.
This is why I can't really understand the hope of some that Roberts would somehow bring Kennedy back into the fold.
Kennedy is a lost cause on Culture War issues, as is likely the entire Court now.
I don't think we will see a legal restriction on abortion in the United States in our lifetime. Obviously, the people don't want it--no matter how many noises they make to the contrary. Frankly, I wonder if it's time for the pro-life movement to turn its time and money toward other avenues for curtailing abortion.
I just wrote this on another thread, but I'll write it here to get your opinions. We don't have to say that all is lost when it comes to conservative appointments because Bush (if he has the guts) can recess appoint the most conservative judges he can find. It would not be the final word, but it would be better than caving to the dem senate on a permanent appointment, and the issue would still be in play when the 2008 elections rolled around, when it would then be up to us to elect a good conservative president and senate.
Folks, do not lose heart. The pro-life movement is very close to a tremendous victory. We may have some bitter setbacks before that, but the wave is in full motion. It's always darkest before the dawn. Victory is just around the corner.
Alito, Thomas, Scalia, and Roberts will vote to uphold the ban. Kennedy has been a worthless justice from day one. He wants to be liked more than anything else.
Kennedy is the biggest windsock on the court now that O'Connor has left.
According to a Law Professor I know who's got a rather distinquished history in the Bush Sr. Justice Department, Kennedy was actually about to rule against abortion in Casy v. Planned Parenthood, but changed his mind at the last minute after O'Connor got to him.
Damn them both.
"Damn them both."
That's a pretty safe bet in the hereafter, where REAL justice will be dispensed.
If we get what we deserve, we'll all be damned. So I hope O'Connor and Kennedy are spared the consequences of their sins just like I know I will be.
But I can't help b!tch them out in the meantime.
Yes, he did, and absolute proof of that came out a year or so ago when former Justice Blackmun's papers were released. In the files, there was information about the original vote at conference (5-4 to overrule Roe), and then there was a note from Kennedy to Blackmun that he had welcome news for him. (He had changed his mind.) Souter and O'Connor had been working in secret to form a "moderate" opinion that would reaffirm Roe for the most part. They then pushed Kennedy on it, and he gave in and joined their secret opinion. Rehnquist was shocked when he learned that the majority had flipped and had been taken away from him by stealth. Blackmun was overjoyed at this, but still acted in public and in his dissent like he was upset that the three hadn't reaffirmed every last word of Roe. It was a clever ruse, but word leaked out shortly thereafter and because Blackmun wanted his papers released rather than destroyed, there is now proof of most of it.
One story regarding the Casey decision, and it's one I trust greatly, is that Kennedy actually contacted and encouraged a member of the press to follow him the day the decision was announced.
That's the kind of person Kennedy is. He should go down in history as one of the worst, most self-centered justices, but he won't, thanks to his liberal decisions. Oh, and we won't even go into how arrogant he acts at times, even to his clerks, but plenty of those stories can be found online, mainly from former clerks who choose to remain anonymous.
These elitist judges are far, far too smug to ever repent of their sins and receive God's mercy through His son in this lifetime.
That's the difference. One thing God truly despises, and it's pridefulness.
I think we ought to consider a law that people as old and feeble as Kennedy ought to have their brains sucked out by a doctor.
It's true that pride is the worst of all sins, but if he can save Saul, who got his jollies feeling important by being the chief Christian killer, he can save anybody.
So you're saying he's going to vote uphold the ban?
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.