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 ...
I don’t think they would need an amendment at this point. A bill would probably suffice. I would guess the decision would be quite narrow only saying it isn’t in the constitution, which still allows for Congress to enact it legislatively.
I think this is more closely related to the pending 2nd Amendment decision.
if the court gives the “rights” of citizens to the unborn.....it would effectively overturn it.
The Constitution can be amended.
Any ruling that ignores the original intent (as evidenced by practices and laws that no one considered to be unconstitutional at the dawn of the republic) should be overturned and the court should suggest that it is not an editorial board, and any editing of the Constitution is to be done via the amendment process.
The courts have been all too willing to do the job that is actually the duty of Congress - legislating in order to avoid nonsensical or absurd outcomes. Sometimes that should include amending the Constitution.
Pray...Pray...Pray....Pray....Pray.....
Which is Constitutional and would allow for those that do not wish to be in any way a supporter of murdering the unborn the chance to move out of that state and move to a state where it was illegal.
“That’s only two diamonds in the dung heap. His tax cuts were dominated by ineffective demand side rebates”
Look closely, and you’ll notice the War diamond doesn’t shine too brightly. Surely Bush was rhetorically tough, but in practice Obama has proven to be about the same. Yeah, he’s going to put terrorists on trial in a civilian court and claims to want nothing to do with “torture”. Also...well, those are about the only differences. Gitmo’s still open. We’re still in Iraq. We’re still piling sanctions on Iran. We’re surging in Afghanistan.
Fifty million innocent people is already worse than the Holocaust.
Quite true.
(And THANK you, President Bush!!)
We need to PRAY for this man. He is a gift from God!
Expectations pretty high there??
ping — The could make history
(You can photoshop in a dung heap for effect if you'd like. I'm sure you have one in your storehouse of "evidence" that President Bush was evil. LOL)
God bless President Bush. He, by his choices of Roberts and Alito may well be preserving this great Republic. God BLESS him!
If he dies on the bench, will he still have a vote?
Overturning Roe v Wade is not the same as ruling “life begins at conception”. It will just give the states the authority to make their own laws regarding abortion, just as it was before the 1973 ruling.
Big ol' ditto and bump !
How difficult it must be for a low-intellect SC Justice aff-action appointee lackey like Sotomayor to be so owned by the wisdom of a higher intellect (Roberts)!
LMFAO!
Even though he has left office, President Bush's steadfast support for the sanctity of life goes on.
The importance of this cannot be overstated.
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.