US v. Nixon and the constitutional right to an abortion - they are more related than one would think
SCOTUS's decision in US v. Nixon during Watergate was one of that court's finest hours: while SCOTUS found that the President had a right to assert "executive privilege", SCOTUS found that this right, when asserted in a generalized way, could not be used by Richard Nixon to refuse to turn over his tapes where he and his colleagues discussed issues associated with Watergate.
SCOTUS specifically found that, although there was NO mention in the US Constitution, about the concept of "executive privilege", it nevertheless did exist. But it was not enough to allow Nixon to assert executive privilege in a blanket way to avoid turning over evidence that was directly relevant to pending criminal proceedings against Nixon henchmen like Bob Haldeman, John Ehrlichman etc.
That makes total sense. Indeed, while US v. Nixon directly led Nixon to resign just a couple of weeks from the decision, Nixon himself stated he was "gratified" that SCOTUS had found the existence of executive privilege as a matter of constitutional law (again, never mentioned in the US Constitution).
How does this relate to abortion? Well, there is no mention of abortion in the US Constitution (much like executive privilege). But NEVER let anyone tell you that the argument that abortion is not mentioned in the Constitution is dispositive on the issue that it is NOT constitutionally protected.
Republicans/RWingers will find rights in the US Constitution that are NEVER mentioned when it suits their agenda. But, in total hypocrisy, when it doesn't suit them politically, they adopt the nonsense of "strict constructionism" or "textual literalism" and claim that, like abortion, it's not mentioned, so it doesn't exist. I am sure there are TONS of other examples of this hypocrisy.
Please NEVER fall for it.
= new reply since forum marked as read
