Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Chief Justice Roberts Flips On Supreme Court – The Moderate Just Went After China, North Korea On Viability Standard
gopdailybrief.com ^ | December 2, 2021 | Adam Casalino

Posted on 12/02/2021 8:12:45 PM PST by UMCRevMom@aol.com

What’s Happening:

This week, the Supreme Court heard arguments on a case that could have a dramatic impact on the future of our country. They will be ruling on a pro-life law out of Mississippi. Their decision could strike down Roe v. Wade, the court ruling that legalized abortion in the United States.

Many critics believe the key “swing” vote on the court will come from Brett Kavanaugh. Why? Because many assumed Chief Justice Roberts would side with the liberal wing of the party.

But something Roberts just said flipped the court on its ear. And the left just might have lost this fight. From The Western Journal:

The Supreme Court held in both Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) that the viability of the unborn child outside the womb is a “critical fact” states can weigh in establishing abortion law…

During Wednesday’s oral arguments, Roberts noted that viability is a pretty low and arbitrary standard that the court had created in the Roe decision.

“When you get to the viability standard, we share that standard with the People’s Republic of China and North Korea,” he said.

While discussing this case that addresses the historic Roe v. Wade ruling, Roberts shook up the country when he addressed the “viability standard.” Roe and another case from 1992 determined that states can decide abortion laws, based on an unborn child’s “viability” outside the womb.

Many pro-choice advocates argued that because a child before a certain period cannot survive outside the womb, for some reason, that justifies aborting them. (You’d think that meant the child was more vulnerable and should be protected.) But it appeared Roberts took issue with this long-standing argument from the left.

He said that we share this “viability standard” with communist dictatorships like North Korea and China. In that context, it appears Roberts is criticizing this standard. Americans are far more “liberal” than most other countries in the world on this standard.

He went on to say that the United States should not look to “international law to set our constitutional standards.” This suggests that Roberts is not convinced Roe should stand.

But does this mean he will ultimately vote against this 1970s ruling? Could Roberts end up siding with his conservative colleagues and overturning this ruling—and outlawing the practice at the federal level?

It’s too early to tell, but let’s just say that Democrats are getting very nervous right about now, especially since conservatives don’t need Roberts to overturn this historic case.

Key Takeaways:

-Chief Justice Roberts criticized the “viability standards” established by Roe v. Wade. -Roberts compared the United States with China and North Korea, which share this standard. -Some believe this suggests the justice might vote with conservatives in this case.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

1 posted on 12/02/2021 8:12:45 PM PST by UMCRevMom@aol.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

Roberts might realize that but he might be afraid to overhaul Roe vs Wade due to its political impact. I doubt that he has that kind of courage.


2 posted on 12/02/2021 8:15:31 PM PST by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

I’m afraid you are correct. But, just maybe the other Supremes will stand uo that he won’t fold?!?!


3 posted on 12/02/2021 8:17:03 PM PST by UMCRevMom@aol.com ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

.


4 posted on 12/02/2021 8:17:40 PM PST by justrepublican (Screaming like a "Vexatious requester" at a Wellstone memorial........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Robert’s might want to start thinking about the eternal impact of his decisions.


5 posted on 12/02/2021 8:19:27 PM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: justrepublican

Roberts is spineless and will go with the most politically expedient ruling. He doesn’t want the Lefts hatred for overturning ROE v Wade. Once a wimp, always a wimp!


6 posted on 12/02/2021 8:20:40 PM PST by kgrif_Salinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

Don’t hold your breath. I’m through trying to depend on an undependable chief justice.


7 posted on 12/02/2021 8:28:51 PM PST by nagant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

He will declare Roe v Wade a tax.


8 posted on 12/02/2021 8:29:02 PM PST by Sertorius (A hayseed with no Greek and dam^ proud of it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

Viability is a terrible logical standard.

Every life is viable in the environment it’s biologically meant to survive in, and not viable outside of it.

A fish is viable in water, and not viable on land. A grown human being is viable on land and not viable at the bottom of the ocean.

A human being in the fetal developmental stage is viable in the womb, the environment its meant to be survive in. To argue that it is not a human life and therefor ok to kill because it can’t survive if you take him out of the womb, is as absurd than saying a grown person can be killed because he’s can’t survive in a vacuum and therefore not “viable”.


9 posted on 12/02/2021 8:36:58 PM PST by Truthsearcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Truthsearcher

Viability is a terrible standard.

It relegates the existence of human life to technology, a hideous thought. The only issue for abortion is the start of human life; everything else is diversion.


10 posted on 12/02/2021 8:41:00 PM PST by budj (Combat vet, 2nd of three generations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

“I doubt that he has that kind of courage.”

I don’t know if courage has anything to do with it, I have long thought Roberts was compromised with since his vote on Obamacare and then when photos surfaced of him purported to be from Epstein’s Pedo-Island.

Not reliable in any sense of the word on his judicial philosophy, one way or the other.


11 posted on 12/02/2021 8:46:04 PM PST by Bshaw (A nefarious deceit is upon us all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Truthsearcher

Every life is viable in the environment it’s biologically meant to survive in, and not viable outside of it. A fish is viable in water, and not viable on land. A grown human being is viable on land and not viable at the bottom of the ocean.
***Well said.


12 posted on 12/02/2021 8:47:30 PM PST by Kevmo (I’m immune from Covid since I don’t watch TV.🤗)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Truthsearcher

“Viability” mirrors the Nazi standard, catching up not only the unborn but all children, the infirm, those with mental defects — anyone who wouldn’t make it on their own unaided.


13 posted on 12/02/2021 8:48:20 PM PST by No.6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

roberts cares not what the conservative court justices do, the two real genuine ones remaining.


14 posted on 12/02/2021 8:49:36 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

This means Roberts will vote with the majority. But that means he gets to write the decision. If he follows his general practice in controversial conservative decisions, the decision he writes will be so narrow as to have no precedential value.


15 posted on 12/02/2021 8:53:28 PM PST by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

🙏


16 posted on 12/02/2021 8:53:41 PM PST by gitmo (If your theology doesn't become your biography, what good is it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com
The ‘viability standard’ is an absurd notion. From the moment of conception virtually every child is viable; Provided of course that the child is left alone and not aborted.

The baby only becomes unviable if it’s life is ended prematurely or dies in the womb of natural causes.

17 posted on 12/02/2021 9:00:02 PM PST by LVS1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Truthsearcher

Excellent rebuttal.


18 posted on 12/02/2021 9:01:43 PM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com
The strongest logical argument against abortion is that the baby (“fetus” to liberals) is NOT part of the mother’s body. No matter how many times they chant, “My body, my choice!”, the baby is not “their body.” It is an independent entity with its own blood supply, blood type, unique genetics, etc. In fact, as the baby’s innate immune system is developing while in the womb, it is training itself to recognize what is part of the baby’s body, versus something foreign, like the mother’s body, for example. That way, once the baby is born it’s innate immune system can immediately recognize any harmful bacteria or viruses, because it has already mapped out what constitutes the baby’s body.

And of course, where is the father’s “choice” in all of this? If we’re going to entertain the absurd “my body” argument for a moment, then the baby is every bit as much a part of the father’s body as the mother’s. In fact, the father contributes most of the genetic material during conception.

19 posted on 12/02/2021 9:02:04 PM PST by noiseman (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

I saw one person predict that Roberts would vote with the majority so he would be able to write the opinion. If it’s a 5-4 vote with Roberts in the minority, Thomas writes the opinion, and I would guess he would be much broader in his view that Roe is bad law.


20 posted on 12/02/2021 9:05:30 PM PST by Repealthe17thAmendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson