Okay, so that title is not very appealing. But I just read an article that clinched the already sure vote of mine for Bush. Apparently five of nine Supreme Court judges support current abortion rights. But if Bush is re-elected he will be able to appoint a new judge. This could upset the balance and allow the Roe vs. Wade ruling of 1973 to be overturned. Exciting! The article goes on to say that twenty-one states are at high risk for banning abortion, nine in middle risk, and twenty at lower risk. This surprised me. All 50 states are at risk for banning abortion. I had no idea that most of the nation's legislation actually want abortion banned.
This news definitely clinches my vote for Bush.
2 comments:
I find it interesting that the article had that particular effect on you, as the study was published by the Center for Reproductive Rights
http://www.crlp.org/
which is a pro-choice organization that published the study in order to rally support against Bush. Needless to say the will be dissappointed to find that many of us see it as a dream come true rather than the nightmare that they fear.
-Mr. Sparkle
I don't know how that article is tallying the votes. Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas are the only solidly reliable anti-abortion judges. O'Connor and Kennedy are the two swing voters, but they both made their opinions known in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, in which they upheld abortion rights. And there's no way that Souter, Breyer or Ginsberg would ever cut back abortion rights. Ever. And Stevens is on another planet. There's no way to tell what he will do on a given occasion.
Note also that a second-term GWB does not mean one, but likely three Supreme Court appointments. That's good news and bad news. The good news is that O'Connor and Stevens are on that list, and if they get replaced by pro-lifers, we're up to the necessary five (plus a possible Kennedy makes six). The bad news is two-fold: first, Rehnquist is also a retiree, and it's virtually impossible to get a replacement who will be more conservative than him.
The second, and more important, consideration, is that it's one thing to nominate your ideal judge, but another thing entirely to actually get him or her confirmed. The Dems in the Senate recently discovered the power of the filibuster in judicial nominations, and they're determined to use it as often as possible. And question number one, by any liberal Senator, is guaranteed to be "will you overturn Roe v. Wade?" If the answer is yes, filibuster. If the answer is no, then they are lying to conceal their true conservative hate-mongering, and they get the filibuster anyway.
So Bush only has limited wiggle room, regardless of how many nominations he gets.
Post a Comment