Posted on 01/25/2010 11:34:34 AM PST by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
Chief Justice John Roberts last week made it clear that the Supreme Court over which he presides will not hesitate to sweep away its own major constitutional rulings when doing so is necessary to defend America’s bedrock governing document.
The announcement of that guiding core principle means two very big things. First, Roberts and his fellow strict constructionists on the court are now armed and ready with a powerful rationale for overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion ruling if Justice Anthony Kennedy or a future justice becomes the fifth vote against Roe.
Secondly, successfully placing Roberts atop the high court is beginning to look like former President George W. Bush’s most important legacy – a gift that will keep on giving for conservatives for decades.
In last Thursday’s 5-to-4 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling dismantling the McCain-Feingold campaign law, Roberts joined with fellow Bush appointee Justice Samuel Alito to issue a separate concurrence “to address the important principles of judicial restraint and stare decisis implicated in this case.”
While Roberts conceded that “departures from precedent are inappropriate in the absence of a ‘special justification,’” he quickly added that “At the same time, stare decisis is neither an ‘inexorable command’… nor ‘a mechanical formula of adherence to the latest decision’ … especially in constitutional cases,” noting that “If it were, segregation would be legal, minimum wage laws would be unconstitutional, and the Government could wiretap ordinary criminal suspects without first obtaining warrants.”
Instead, under the “stare decisis” judicial doctrine of respecting past rulings, “When considering whether to re-examine a prior erroneous holding, we must balance the importance of having constitutional questions decided against the importance of having them decided right.” The chief justice declared: “stare decisis is not an end in itself.”
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Let the states that allow it bear the brunt of God’s wrath, instead of it continuing to come down on us all.
* * * * * * *
What “wrath” is that?
To many Americans have moralized abortion.
* * * *
Right, they got 50 million of them. That’s voting with your feet, too.
I’m already seeing the old liberal standby around the ‘net of “coat hangers and back alleys!! Coat hangers and back alleys!!”
Sheesh. These liberals are so ignorant, along with being morally reprehensible!!!
Praying for SCOTUS to do the right thing ping!
Well, we've had tens, hundreds of thousands, even millions, of murders, drunk driving fatalities, child molestations.
Is that your morality test, "all the cool kids are doing it?"
How juvenile.
Just as long as everyone understands that overturning Roe does not make abortion illegal in the US. It throws the issue back to the states to make their own decisions. I don’t believe you will ever see a time when SCOTUS outright bans abortion. SCOTUS may at some point roll it back to first trimester only even in the states, but that wouldn’t occur on a Roe overturn. It’s far down the road.
Wow, the majority of people are prolife and now this. I feel our prayers are being answered.
Yes, but we need to keep praying.
Especially during the 40 Days for Life in front of abortion clinics!
I didn’t say it was MY standard, it’s THEIRS.
I pray every day to end abortion, and fortunately there are no abortion clinics in my tiny town. However, my husband have driven out of town to protest on occasion.
The Court needs to reinstitute the Tenth Amendment and begin getting MANY issues de-federalized and put back into the states—Life is simply one of them.
No, not if they truly repent, bulldoze the altars of child sacrifice and NEVER let it happen again on an individual level.
The Old Testament King Manasseh who was guilty of this:
The Lord brought the commanders of the army of the king of Assyria against them, and
they captured Manasseh with hooks (things put through the nose), bound him with bronze chains, and
took him And when he was in distress, he entreated the Lord his God and humbled himself greatly
before the God of his fathers.
When he prayed to Him, He was moved by his entreaty and heard his supplication, and brought him
again to Jerusalem to his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the Lord was God.
Unfortunately, God never forgave the NATION of Israel for this and brought judgment. The only time God did not forgive.
“However, the LORD did not turn from the fierceness of His great wrath with which His anger
burned against Judah, because of all the provocations with which Manasseh had provoked Him. And
the LORD said, “I will remove Judah also from My sight, as I have removed Israel. And I will cast
off Jerusalem, this city which I have chosen, and the temple (house) of which I said, ‘My name shall
be there’.” “Surely at the command (mouth) of the LORD it came upon Judah, to remove them
from His sight because of the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he had done, and also for the
innocent blood which he shed, for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood; AND THE LORD
WOULD NOT FORGIVE.” (All caps mine) 2 Kings 23: 26 & 27 and 24: 3 & 4.
It was an eye-opening study.
bookmark
As he suggests, Brown basically ignored more than 50 years of precedent. That’s because Plessy ignored the plain intent of the 14th Amendment.
“Justice Roberts Hints He Could Overturn Roe”
If he did that I would immediately take back one or two nasty things I have said about George Bush.
Shouldn’t the earlier cases be tossed out too? Such as the birth control case from the 1960s which led to Roe?
Justice Roberts is top notch. Remember how he blew away Sen. Chuck Schumer during his confirmation hearings? Talk about intellectual firepower...BOOOOYAH!
Hmmm...I thought I detected a little bit of snottiness in your question, but I gave you the benefit of the doubt. If I made any mistake, it's that. Your question, by your own admission, was disingenuous.
I was precise and accurate in my statement...your question did not address what I said. Credit for Roberts has to be balanced with the choice of Harriet Miers as his other nominee. It was pressure from the base and Senators...his "friends" that brought Sam Alito.
Harriet Miers' main qualification for the SC was a close personal friendship with W.
Now, what else would you like to address?
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.