John Roberts on Roe v. Wade

[Fiona]

"Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. ... There is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent.""


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050719/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_bush


Take a breath. He's horrid on plenty of issues, but he's not going to outlaw abortion.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

1. Not so fast.

...a brief he co-wrote in 1990 that suggested the Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 high court decision that legalized abortion.

"The court's conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion ... finds no support in the text, structure or history of the Constitution," the brief said.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20050719/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_bush_46

[Cush]

4. MSNBC just said that he signed the brief, wasn't part of it

[Rufus T. Firefly]

6. I'd say signing something MAKES you part of it.

[jackstraw45]

13. And we all know that MSNBC has no agenda....

:eyes:


See 13, Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173 (1991) (Nos. 89-1391, 89-1392).

"wecontinue to believe that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and should be overruled."

WE includes everyone who signed the brief, ie ROBERTS.

No White House spin changes he signed his name to those words.

[peace frog]

2. Oh no?

.. from the Contra Costa Times...

"When Roberts was nominated for the D.C. Circuit in 2003, Clinton's former solicitor general, Seth Waxman, called Roberts an "exceptionally well-qualified appellate advocate."

He put in his time advising the Bush legal team in Florida during the battle over the 2000 presidential election and has often argued conservative positions before the court -- but they can be attributed to clients, not necessarily to him.

That includes a brief he wrote for President George H.W. Bush's administration in a 1991 abortion case, in which he observed that "we continue to believe that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and should be overruled."

Roberts won the case -- Rust v. Sullivan -- in which the Supreme Court agreed with the administration that the government could require doctors and clinics receiving federal funds to avoid talking to patients about abortion."

[tmooses]

3. He accepted the existing law but does not agree with it. From the

same article, "The court's conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion ... finds no support in the text, structure or history of the Constitution," the brief said.

When it comes up for a vote he will vote against it--IMHO.

[K-W]

7. On the other hand, does Bush want Roe overturned.

I think that is the million dollar question.

[SmokingJacket]

26. Bing. Go.

He wants the support of his base, yes; now especially that everything else is going so wrong for him. So he wants to play the abortion card as long as he can. Putting an anti-Roe guy on the SC right now will rally a certain amount of hard-right support behind him.

Ultimately, however, overturning Roe will spell doom for the Republican party. They won't do it. Watch: when Rehnquist leaves in the next few months, they'll get someone like Gonzales, who's pro-choice but otherwise crazy-rightwing. The balance will continue.

[K-W]

5. It isnt so clear at all.

As an appellete judge he said that. Now he will be in a position where he determines the precedent.

[nankerphelge]

8. "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land...

until I get on the Court."

[Misunderestimator]

9. Take a breath? Oh sure... I'm not planning on getting pregnant...

doesn't affect me at all, so it's all cool. Just because he believes abortion should be illegal doesn't mean he's going to outlaw it. Of course not! Why would anyone think a supreme court justice even has the power to do that... :sarcasm:

[Fiona]

11. Huh?

I just offered a direct quote. Now one can argue that he's a liar, but I don't see evidence of that yet.

One can simultaneously believe that Roe was wrongly decided, and still believe it should be upheld.

[Misunderestimator]

16. Why do we need to see evidence when he has already said...

that he thinks the law was wrongly decided? I'm not interested in finding out if he's a liar about his personal integrity. The stakes are too high.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

19. "The perfect playpal for Scalia on the court."

-Jonathan Turley, Georgetown University on Countdown with Keith Olbermann.

[Fiona]

20. I know a number of people

who are very much in favor of abortion rights, and still believe Roe to be wrongly decided. I don't think Roberts is in favor of abortion rights, but I just presented a direct quote in which he says he'd uphold Roe.

I'm just trying to quell the hysteria - I see it's a pointless endeavor. You can all go back to screaming and wailing. Sorry to interrupt.

[Misunderestimator]

22. Thanks... I'll go back to my screaming and wailing now...

[Swamp Rat]

25. I am with you!

How about women just deny men sex? I bet you'd hear a lot of pityful screaming and wailing then... I am so mad right now, partially because of the so-called progressives on this board willing to bargain away your right to choose.

Roberts is NOT a legitimate choice, NO MATTER WHAT PEOPLE SAY HERE!!!!

[Fiona]

27. I never said a damned thing

about bargaining away the right to choice. You'd be hard-pressed to find a stronger advocate of abortion rights than me. I'm simply saying that a brief he wrote while representing the government's side in a case does NOT mean he would vote to overturn Roe.

I provided a quote wherein he says he would NOT overturn Roe... and in that instance, he was speaking for himself, not the Justice Department under GHW Bush.

Further, the last thing Republicans want to do is overturn Roe. They'd much rather win elections than outlaw abortion.

[Swamp Rat]

28. I wasn't talking to you or about you. n/t

[Barak And Roll]

23. Ginsburg

Ginsburg has made comments to this effect as well.

[ole_evil_eye]

10. I'm just breathing easy

that it isn't Ashcroft like I heard it might be

From what I hear there isn't a big paper trail on this guy.

I knew Bush was goin to nominate a conservative, but I've been crammin all I could find on this guy in the last 20 minutes and I haven't seen anything that raises any red flags yet


So yea, I'm breathing a liiiiittle bit easier...

[Misunderestimator]

17. You haven't seen ANYTHING that raises any read flags about him?

What?

[No Michael Savage]

12. From Drudge:

Roberts: 'We continue to believe that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and should be overruled'...

[papau]

14. Naral's old fact sheet on John Roberts included the statements below:

Naral's old fact sheet on John Roberts included the statements below:


NARAL: REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM & CHOICE JUNE 2001
John G. Roberts, Jr.
Previously nominated by President George Bush to the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, 1992.
Principal Deputy Solicitor General of the United States, 1989-93.

"The Court was so accustomed to the Solicitor General and the Deputy Solicitor General arguing for the overturn of Roe that during John Roberts¡¦ oral argument before the Supreme Court in Bray, a Justice asked, ¡§Mr. Roberts, in this case are you asking that Roe v. Wade be overruled?¡¨ He responded, ¡§No, your honor, the issue doesn¡¦t even come up.¡¨ To this the justice said, ¡§Well that hasn¡¦t prevented the Solicitor General from taking that position in prior cases.¡¨Transcript of Oral Argument of John Roberts, Jr., dated Oct. 16, 1991, Bray v. Alexandria Women¡¦s Health Clinic, 506 U.S. 263 (1993) (No. 90-985).

As Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts argued in a brief before the U.S. Supreme Court (in a case that did not implicate Roe v. Wade) that ¡§e continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled¡K. he Court¡¦s conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion¡K finds no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution.¡¨Brief for the Respondent at 13, Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173 (1991) (Nos. 89-1391, 89-1392).
In Rust v. Sullivan -500 U.S. 173 (19917), the Supreme Court considered whether Department of Health and Human Services regulations limiting the ability of Title X recipients to engage in abortion-related activities violated various constitutional provisions. Roberts, appearing on behalf of HHS as Deputy Solicitor General, argued that this domestic gag rule did not violate constitutional protections.ƒnRoberts, again as Deputy Solicitor General, argued as amicus curiae for the United States supporting Operation Rescue and six other individuals who routinely blocked access to reproductive health care clinics, arguing that the
protesters¡¦ behavior did not amount to discrimination against women even though only women could exercise the right to seek an abortion. Intervening as amicus is a wholly discretionary decision on the part of the Solicitor General. Here the government chose to involve itself in a case in support of those who sought to deprive women of the right to choose. Roberts argued that the protesters¡¦ blockade and protests merely amounted to an expression of their opposition to abortion and that a civil rights remedy was therefore inappropriate.

[Swamp Rat]

15. We are entering the Dark Ages again

If we don't fight them NOW, women will become second class citizens, like pets.

[Sapphire Blue]

24. Current Conservative Threat Level

Current Conservative Threat Level

Updated July 13, 2005

Severe: Return to Middle Ages Likely
Supreme Court opening(s) finally give Bush a chance to roll back the clock to the happier days of the Spanish Inquisition. Rove scandal, failure of Iraq speech and awful polls can't offset SCOTUS and London bombing upside for the luckiest man ever. Threat level raised from Orange/High (Church and State to Merge).

The Conservative Threat Advisory System

Severe: Return to Middle Ages Likely

High: Church and State to Merge

Elevated: Bill of Rights at Risk

Guarded: Upward Income Redistribution Underway

Low: Justice and Reason Still Prevail

http://www.perrspectives.com/features/ctl.htm

[Kraklen]

18. You'd believe the word of a Bush appointee?

Have you learned nothing?

[Fiona]

21. I have no reason to believe

that everything out of this man's mouth is a lie.

Simply being republican isn't enough evidence.