Dancing Around Roe v Wade, Iraq War
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
September 13, 2005
(CNSNews.com) - There it was, moments after John Roberts' second day of confirmation hearings got underway in Washington at 9:30 a.m. EDT: Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the first to question Roberts, raised "the issue of a woman's right to choose and Roe versus Wade."
Specter also raised the legal concept of stare decisis, which literally means to stand on what has been decided -- the concept that "settled law" (such as Roe v Wade) must be upheld.
"The importance of settled expectations in the application of stare decisis is a very important consideration," Roberts replied. But it's not the only consideration, he added:
"The principles of stare decisis look at a number of factors," Roberts elaborated, including "settled expectations. Whether or not particular precedents have proven to be unworkable is another consideration on the other side; whether the doctrinal bases of a decision have been eroded by subsequent developments."
"There's no doctrinal-basis erosion in Roe, is there?" Specter asked. (In other words, is there some new development that would form the basis for the Supreme Court overturning its 1973 ruling that legalized abortion?)
Roberts replied that he would stay away from the discussion of particular cases.
"I'm happy to discuss the principles of stare decisis," Roberts said, noting that the courts have decided a number of cases on how precedent should be applied.
"Do you believe today that the right to privacy does exist in the Constitution?" Specter asked Roberts a short time later.
Roberts replied that he does believe that right to privacy is protected under the first, third and fourth amendments. In addition, he said, the court has -- through a series of decisions -- "recognized that personal privacy is a component of liberty protected by the due process clause" (14th Amendment).
Next up, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) was intent on getting Roberts to answer the question, does Congress have the power to terminate a war?
Roberts said he would not address issues that might come before the court; he said he believes "very strongly" in the separation of powers; and he said that in his work for previous presidents, he naturally defended the power of the executive branch, just as attorneys working for the Senate and the House are intent on defending the power of Congress.
Leahy appeared to be miffed by Roberts' suggestion that Leahy was "overreading" one of Roberts' memos dating back 20 or more years.
Roberts said the memo to which Leahy referred had nothing to do with terminating hostilities -- it had to do with the eligibility for certain pension benefits.
Link Here
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
September 13, 2005
(CNSNews.com) - There it was, moments after John Roberts' second day of confirmation hearings got underway in Washington at 9:30 a.m. EDT: Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the first to question Roberts, raised "the issue of a woman's right to choose and Roe versus Wade."
Specter also raised the legal concept of stare decisis, which literally means to stand on what has been decided -- the concept that "settled law" (such as Roe v Wade) must be upheld.
"The importance of settled expectations in the application of stare decisis is a very important consideration," Roberts replied. But it's not the only consideration, he added:
"The principles of stare decisis look at a number of factors," Roberts elaborated, including "settled expectations. Whether or not particular precedents have proven to be unworkable is another consideration on the other side; whether the doctrinal bases of a decision have been eroded by subsequent developments."
"There's no doctrinal-basis erosion in Roe, is there?" Specter asked. (In other words, is there some new development that would form the basis for the Supreme Court overturning its 1973 ruling that legalized abortion?)
Roberts replied that he would stay away from the discussion of particular cases.
"I'm happy to discuss the principles of stare decisis," Roberts said, noting that the courts have decided a number of cases on how precedent should be applied.
"Do you believe today that the right to privacy does exist in the Constitution?" Specter asked Roberts a short time later.
Roberts replied that he does believe that right to privacy is protected under the first, third and fourth amendments. In addition, he said, the court has -- through a series of decisions -- "recognized that personal privacy is a component of liberty protected by the due process clause" (14th Amendment).
Next up, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) was intent on getting Roberts to answer the question, does Congress have the power to terminate a war?
Roberts said he would not address issues that might come before the court; he said he believes "very strongly" in the separation of powers; and he said that in his work for previous presidents, he naturally defended the power of the executive branch, just as attorneys working for the Senate and the House are intent on defending the power of Congress.
Leahy appeared to be miffed by Roberts' suggestion that Leahy was "overreading" one of Roberts' memos dating back 20 or more years.
Roberts said the memo to which Leahy referred had nothing to do with terminating hostilities -- it had to do with the eligibility for certain pension benefits.
Link Here
posted by Kangaroo Brisbane Australia at 6:10 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home