Posted on 09/06/2018 1:30:23 PM PDT by Morgana
Under questioning from pro-life Senator Lindsey Graham, Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh confirmed there is no specific right to abortion in the Constitution.
During his nomination hearings, Judge Kavanaugh has been careful to discuss abortion within the context of what the Supreme Court has decided in the precedent-setting cases of Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood without biasing the hearings with his own views in a way that would force him to recuse himself in future abortion cases before the court.
While most of the questioning has been from pro-abortion Democrats attempting to get Kavanaugh to agree that Roe, which allows virtually unlimited abortions up to birth, is settled law that can never be overturned, Graham took a different tact. He wanted Kavanaugh to confirm that a so-called right to abortion doesnt exist in the Constitution. And Kavanaugh, who tried to remain impartial and to merely refer what the Supreme Court has done, eventually confirm that no specific words exist creating a right to kill unborn babies in abortions.
Is there any phrase in the Constitution about abortion? Graham asked Kavanaugh.
The Supreme Court has found that under the liberty clause, but youre right that specific words, Kavanaugh said before stopping as Graham continued. Kavanaugh clearly was beginning to admit Grahams point that abortion or a right to abortion is never specifically addressed in the Constitution but was made up by the Supreme Court in 1973.
Graham then continued to focus on how the high court invented the abortion right.
SIGN THE PETITION: Vote to Confirm Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh
I dont remember [a right to abortion] being part of American history, so how did the court determine that it was? The last time I checked, liberty didnt apply to abortion. The Supreme Court said it did, but heres the point: what are the limits on this concept?
The exchange appears below:
Earlier today, a new document was released showing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is possibly open to overturning the infamous Roe v Wade decision that allows virtually unlimited abortions up to birth.
During the first day of questioning, Judge Brett Kavanaugh refused to say that there is a so-called right to abortion. He declined to take the bait from pro-abortion Senator Dianne Feinstein who wants to get him to commit to upholding Roe v Wade once he is confirmed to the Supreme Court.
Kavanaugh also refused a pro-abortion senators request to promise to never overturn Roe v Wade, the high court case allowing abortions up to birth.
*******VIDEO ON LINK*********
Yup, court-made “law” is right up there with “executive order” law. Neither are really “law” at all, and are always subject to change by the following court or administration. Real laws are passed by the Congress and signed by the President, and no law can violate the Constitution.
There is no wording in the Constitution or in the Bill of Rights having to do with abortion. (See Amendment 10 below). At the time when Roe vs. Wade was enacted, 48 States had restrictions on abortion. One State had partial restrictions and one State had free access to abortion.
10th AMENDMENT
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
11TH AMENDMENT
The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
They cant ask them to say they will vote a certain way on anything. This is unethical to make up your mind on something before its a case. Especially one that will likely come up before the court.
To wit, they made this very same objection when repubs have asked liberal appointees for a promise on an issue.
This would amount to a judge pre-judging a case. The dems would demand that judge recuse themselves because they already had made up their mond before the case ever was argued before them.
BOOKMARKED!
Wenow Kavanaugh is pro-life and we also know that there is nothing in the constitution that mentions abortion. But everyone also knows that his pro-life beliefs are the main force driving the Left's rabid opposition to him...seems odd that one on "our side" would stir them embers on purpose.
The World according to Garp.
The Constitution according to Harris and Feinstein.
Not much difference.
After all its a living breathing document subject to change whenever I want to rub my crotch penumbra./S
The left loses an election, loses the Supreme Court legislature,loses on the economy, loses on Foreign Affairs, wants to get rid of federal Law Enforcement, open the borders for free access,wants one set of laws for leftists and another for Republicans,and its time to amend the Constitution? The left wants to change The Constitution to The Restitution.
Eff them every single one!
PDJT needs to keep beating them like a drum! Mr. President, take them to the wood shed!
Even libtards admit there is no “specific” right to abortion. Instead they somehow apply an already contrived “right to privacy” to abortion.
The Burger court & Warren court went with that "precedent" and used the "right to privacy" standard in Griswold v. Connecticut extended to all sorts of other "rights" over the years, including the "right" to abort babies.
But you know, Kennedy said communism was bad, so anything else he did doesn't matter.
No we don't know that. Any more that we "knew" Roberts would overturn Obamacare. We HOPED he would. Nobody knows WHAT Kavanaugh's actual views on abortion are, and he refuses to disclose that information. His fans assume since he claims to be "originalist", that magically means he will vote the right way on this issue, regardless of whether he actually believes abortion is wrong or not.
For the record: If I was a Senator, I would give him the benefit of the doubt, and vote to confirm Kavanaugh (on the other hand, I was absolutely against Gorsuch, do not believe he would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, and I stand by that)
:-)
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.