“‘This is deja vu all over again,’ said Justice Stephen G. Breyer. ‘We’ve heard it.’” The Supreme Court hears oral arguments on McCain-Feingold…again, and word suggests the act’s fate may now be in jeopardy with Roberts and Alito on the Court. “Those justices seemed open to a Wisconsin anti-abortion group’s challenge of a provision that corporate-funded ads broadcast in the weeks before an election not mention a candidate by name.” Update: Slate‘s Dahlia Lithwick was watching too, and agrees that it doesn’t look good for McCain-Feingold, which she labels a “Dead Duck Walking.”
Tag: Abortion
The Other Shoe Drops.
“The government may use its voice and its regulatory authority to show its profound respect for the life within the woman.” In keeping with a tendency to move right incrementally, without necessarily overturning any laws (one that may also pose trouble for the McCain-Feingold act in coming weeks), the Roberts Court upholds a ban against partial-birth abortion 5-4, with Justice Anthony Kennedy the swing vote. (He was joined, of course, by Justices Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito.) Kennedy’s reasoning? According to Slate‘s always-perceptive Dahlia Lithwick, it was fear of the Inconstant Woman: “Today’s holding is a strange reworking of Taming of the Shrew, with Kennedy playing an all-knowing Baptista to a nation of fickle Biancas.” For her part, Senator Barbara Boxer sadly summed it up as such: “‘It confirms that elections have consequences,’…alluding to Bush’s re-election and the seven GOP Senate wins in 2004 which set the stage for the appointment of Roberts and Alito.“
With that in mind, all the major candidates for 2008 obviously weighed in on the decision in Gonzales v. Carhart, although everyone pretty much followed to party script, even the ostensibly pro-choice Giuliani. [Clinton | Edwards | Giuliani | McCain | Obama | Richardson | Romney] “Wednesday’s ruling raises the stakes for the 2008 presidential election, which is almost certain to pit an abortion-rights Democrat against an anti-abortion Republican.” Let’s not make the same mistake again, y’all.
Taking Initiatives.
Regarding ballot initiatives, it was a bad night for same-sex marriage and marijuana decriminalization. Still, there’s cause for hope around the country in the six state minimum-wage hikes that passed, as well as the repudiation of the stringent abortion law in South Dakota (Justice Kennedy: take note.) Speaking of the Court, its eminent domain decision of last year took a beating in nine states, although California, Idaho, and Washington thankfully repudiated stronger measures that would effectively hobble any kind of federal land regulation.
Why Hath Thou Forsaken Us?
“‘There is a growing feeling among conservatives that the only way to cure the problem is for Republicans to lose the Congressional elections this fall,’ said Richard Viguerie, a conservative direct-mail pioneer.” More trouble for the GOP: The Christian Right looks ready to desert the party in 2006 unless “Congress does more to oppose same-sex marriage, obscenity and abortion.” “‘I can’t tell you how much anger there is at the Republican leadership,’ Mr. Viguerie said. ‘I have never seen anything like it.’” And November’s perfect storm blows stronger…
Dakota goes South.
Something wicked this way comes: Bucking to challenge Roe v. Wade in the Roberts court, the pro-life South Dakota legislature pass a bill outlawing abortion (with no exceptions therein for rape, incest, or non-fatal threats to the mother’s health), and it seems pro-life Gov. Mike Rounds will sign it. On the bright side, even many pro-lifers doubt the Dakota bill will pass constitutional muster — “‘If you’re just reading the law as it stands now, South Dakota’s law doesn’t really stand any chance under Roe or Casey . I have to agree with those who think it’s remote,’ said Chuck Donovan, executive vice president of the Family Research Council and a former lobbyist for the National Right to Life Committee.” Update: Mississippi follows suit.
The Sam Alito Show.
Didn’t we just do this? Well, regardless, the Senate Confirmation hearings for Sam Alito are now underway. Given his dubious paper trail, his conflict-of-interest on the books, the recent disclosures about Dubya’s imperial pretensions and the possibility of a Dem filibuster, Sam “Scalito” Alito looks to have a tougher road ahead than John Roberts. But, who among the GOP, other than possibly Arlen Specter, might vote against him? Barring a Borkish meltdown before the Senate Judiciary, or, unlikelier still, an uprising over the issue of presidential power, I’d be surprised (but not at all dismayed) if Alito isn’t nominated to the bench, particularly with the public (slightly) behind him. That being said, having freakshow GOP pro-lifers like Sam Brownback and Tom Coburn froth at the mouth over Roe v. Wade probably isn’t doing Alito any favors in the court of public opinion. Update: Alito’s opening statement: Aw shucks, I’m just a humble, regular, working-class guy from Jersey, and in no way a scary conservative (although I do really dislike 60’s liberals.) Update 2: Slate‘s Dahlia Lithwick weighs in.
Scalito on the march.
“What can be made of this opportunity to advance the goals of bringing about the eventual overruling of Roe v. Wade and, in the meantime, of mitigating its effects?” He may be on the political back-burner until next month; nevertheless, Sam Alito’s nomination grows increasingly troubling, with word of another rabidly pro-life paper trail in his past which, like his conflicts of interest, he has heretofore failed to disclose.
Read ’em and weep.
“I am particularly proud of my contributions in recent cases in which the government argued…that the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion.” An unearthed 1985 job application by Sam Alito is chock-full of scary quotes by the Justice-nominee. “In the document, Alito said he drew inspiration from the ‘writings of William F. Buckley, Jr., The National Review and Barry Goldwater’s 1964 campaign.‘ ‘In college, I developed a deep interest in constitutional law, motivated in large part by disagreement with Warren Court decisions, particularly in the areas of criminal procedure, the Establishment Clause and reapportionment,’ he said.”
“Scalito”‘s Way.
Dubya kicks off his first post-indictment week by throwing chum to the right-wing fundies and nominating Samuel A. Alito, Jr. to the Supreme Court. So far, he sounds more John Roberts than Harriet Miers, but “[u]nlike Roberts, he has opined from the bench on abortion rights, church-state separation and gender discrimination to the pleasure of conservatives and displeasure of liberals.” Well, if the White House wants a battle to shore up its right flank, it looks like they’re going to get it.
Harriet the Spy?
“She may turn out to be the greatest thing since Antonin Scalia, but when will we know that?” Two days after the Harriet Miers pick, and despite news reports accentuating her strong evangelicism, conservatives are still openly perturbed by the choice (George Will is particularly livid.) As for how she stands on the issues, we still know very little, other than her mixed record on gay rights and probable pro-life stance. (Well, presumably, she’s also pro-lottery.) Nevertheless, it sounds like she’s probably already got Harry Reid’s vote.