Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme Court

[Nascar_James]

Judge Roberts eases his way through first day of hearings.

Looks like he is well on his way to becoming the 17th Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,169108,00.html

 

[no1important]

RE: Roberts Closer to Bec

I don't understand how he can become Chief Justice right away. One would think someone who has been on the bench already, who has expeirence, would be picked for Chief justice.

I also guess America will go back to the dark ages and back alley abortions, sooner than later, once Roe Vs Wade is overturned/reversed.

 

[Nascar_James]

Re: RE: Roberts Closer to Bec

I don't understand how he can become Chief Justice right away. One would think someone who has been on the bench already, who has expeirence, would be picked for Chief justice.

I also guess America will go back to the dark ages and back alley abortions, sooner than later, once Roe Vs Wade is overturned/reversed.

I really hope Roe vs Wade is overturned. No more killing of innocent unborn babies. Things are looking up...

 

[gopher]

Re: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme C

Roe vs Wade will not overturn abortion. In fact, it never addressed the issue of those states where abortion was legal.

In 1973 when the case was decided, the ruling addressed the laws of states which prohibited abortion. Up to that time, about 14 states allowed abortion but Texas did not. In this case the plaintiff contested Texas's law because it prohibited abortion and the SC addressed this matter only. It did not address the legality of those states in which abortion had been legal. Therefore, if Roe vs Wade is overturned, the old laws in those 14 states will go back into the books.

The bottom line is that overturning Roe will actually legalized abortion again. And because all legal precedent had previously allowed abortion, this procedure will now be permanently legal.

 

[no1important]

RE: Roberts Closer to Bec

So Nascar, women will either have to come to a sensible, free democratic country for an abortion.

But in the real world what will happen is "coat hanger" "back alley" abortions will be the norm and injure and kill more women that way. Is that what you want? Is that what your "god" wants? Because in reality thats what will happen if women are denied access to abortions, not to mention women being forced to have babies against their will.

And do you think those women will have proper pre natel care if they are pregnant with a child they do not want, but are forced to keep because of some religious belief. Like what if they are junkies, prostitutes or mentally ill?

Would it not make sense to keep it legal so females who desire one can have it done in a safe place, done by a trained doctor?

I guess you do not approve of the morning after pill then either. btw- it has been availble here for years without a prescription.

Face it, if a women is determined to end a pregnancy she will one way or the other. "Back Alley" or otherwise. I would prefer it legal so it can be done properly.

 

[gopher]

RE: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme C

They will always have the option of going to states where it is legal. This was an option back in 1973 and will likely happen again.

 

[no1important]

Re: RE: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supre

They will always have the option of going to states where it is legal. This was an option back in 1973 and will likely happen again.

You mean like diferent countries?

If the US Supreme Court overturns it, wouldn't it be illegal nation wide? Isn'twhat they say affect all states?

 

[Nascar_James]

Re: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme C

Roe vs Wade will not overturn abortion. In fact, it never addressed the issue of those states where abortion was legal.

In 1973 when the case was decided, the ruling addressed the laws of states which prohibited abortion. Up to that time, about 14 states allowed abortion but Texas did not. In this case the plaintiff contested Texas's law because it prohibited abortion and the SC addressed this matter only. It did not address the legality of those states in which abortion had been legal. Therefore, if Roe vs Wade is overturned, the old laws in those 14 states will go back into the books.

The bottom line is that overturning Roe will actually legalized abortion again. And because all legal precedent had previously allowed abortion, this procedure will now be permanently legal.

Within the US, abortions are not so clear cut. In some states, it will not be possible to get abortions. 16 states still have pre-1973 anti-abortion laws on the books. Those are states that truly respect human life. As an example .. state of Missouri ...

In Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 492 U.S. 490 (1989), the Supreme Court declared in a 5:4 decision that a Missouri law was constitutional. It stated that: Human life began at conception, That Missouri state property could not be used to conduct abortions, and A fetal viability assessment could be required before late term abortions are performed.

 

[gopher]

Re: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme C

If the US Supreme Court overturns it, wouldn't it be illegal nation wide? Isn't what they say affect all states?


Let me first say two things:

1) I have a law degree.

2) I am a pro-lifer.


Here's my reply: in Roe vs Wade, the plaintiff argued that she had a Constitutionally guaranteed right of privacy under the 9th and 14th Amendments and could therefore have this medical procedure done to her as a matter of choice. The Texas prosecutor used that state's criminal statute to deny her the right to that procedure.

The US Supreme Court ruled that she did have a Constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy and could make her own decision as to the procedure because she made that choice in the first trimester of her pregnancy. Therefore, the Court overruled Texas's criminal statute and forced many states to alter their criminal statutes so that they now had to allow the procedure within the guidelines issude by the Court. The decision was unprecedented because prior to this time abortion was considered a matter for states rights, not a matter of Federal Constitutional law.

THE COURT DID NOT OVERRIDE THE LAWS OF STATES WHICH ALLOWED ABORTION. In fact the Court never even mentioned them in the decision. Therefore their legality was and is a moot point.

If Roe is overturned, meaning that a similar plaintiff no longer has a Constitutionally guaranteed right to make her own decision, then states may go back to writing up their own criminal laws to end abortion as Texas had prior to 1973. And since the legality of the law in those other 14 or 15 states was never addressed or litigated in any way their legality remains moot --- that is, unquestioned, unchallenged, unaltered. Thus, those old laws which allowed abortion go back on the books.

Anyone who now wants to challenge those laws will have to prove that they were not legal before Roe. But how would they do so? They were never litigated and conservatives believe in what is called stare decisis meaning that rulings go unreversed if they have been accepted as standard law all along. And the fact remains that these laws were always considered legal.

Therefore, overturning Roe will legalize abortion in those states and women and girls who want the procedure will readily move there in order to get the procedure done. This is what most did prior to 1973.

 

[gopher]

Re: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme C

Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 492 U.S. 490 (1989),


I was in law school at the time this case was decided and had a long discussion about it with a classmate ( a very devout Christian) who is as pro-life as I am. But you have misunderstood its implications.

First, it allowed Missouri to define life as beginning at conception. The Court allowed this as it was theoretical in nature.

Second, the Court ruled that a doctor must take certain viability tests during a 20 week period.

Third, it ruled that certain public facilities which are financed by tax dollars cannot be compelled to practice the procedure.

But (here's the key) it did not rule that abortion is illegal or that the plaintiff cannot get the procedure done elsewhere. Thus, it restricted abortion on demand but did not overrule Roe.



BTW, State Attorney General William L Webster argued this case pro se later confessed to embezzlement and conspiracy and served a two year prison sentence.

 

[no1important]

RE: Roberts Closer to Bec

I really appreciate the clarification Gopher. Thanks. To be honest I think a lot of people have misconceptions about "Roe v Wade" due to the "spin" on each side.

 

[Nascar_James]

Re: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme C

Thanks for the clarification Gopher. The laws are indeed tricky when analyzing the details. Judge Roberts will undoubtedly go over all details with a fine tooth comb. He will see how to best deal with Roe vs Wade in terms of coming up with a strategy to further restrict abortions to where they are not performed on demand, but instead only when dealing with life threatening situations for the expecting mother. An individual of his intelligence will come up with a plan. Plus, I know the next Supreme court judge the President appoints will very likely be a pro-Life'er as well. Things are looking up.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Re: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme C

Roberts can fellate my pudenda... :roll:

 

[gopher]

Re: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme C

An individual of his intelligence will come up with a plan.


Except that a conservative does not believe in legislating from the Bench. Therefore, he would be violating conservative principles if he attempted to come up with a plan.

As someone who believes in a shared, rather than an imposed morality, I say that it is best to have society through its churches and advocacy groupings come up with a humane, pragmatic, and utilizable plan for ending abortion without imposing intrusive legislation.

 

[Nascar_James]

Re: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme C

Most Churches, including the Vatican continuously denounce abortions, however their message falls on deaf ears.

A strategy that Roberts might look into is the approach other developed countries have taken to outlaw abortions. Countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Poland, Switzerland, ...etc have non-abortion polices. The only time it is permitted is for a life threatening situation. Roberts might want to analyze their startegy to see if he can apply it here. I think the UK also has a ban on abortions, or really strict rules governing it.

 

[no1important]

RE: Roberts Closer to Bec

Most Churches, including the Vatican continuously denounce abortions, however their message falls on deaf ears.

Well most Churches including the Vatican treat and view women as second rate or dirt.

I think the UK also has a ban on abortions, or really strict rules governing it.

The UK's abortion law

Abortion is legal in the UK up to the 24th week of pregnancy. However, if there is a substantial risk to the woman's life or if there are fetal abnormalities there is no time limit.

To comply with the 1967 Abortion Act, two doctors must give their consent, stating that to continue with the pregnancy would present a risk to the physical or mental health of the woman or her existing children.

However, the 1967 Act does not extend to Northern Ireland, where abortion is still illegal.

Howard backs abortion law change

 

[Reverend Blair]

Re: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme C

However, the 1967 Act does not extend to Northern Ireland, where abortion is still illegal.

They just legalized divorce there, in a very tight referendum, not too long ago.

 

[gopher]

Re: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme C

strategy

Even Texas had a medical emergency provision in its criminal statute that barred abortions in 1973. And unlike those nations that you mentioned, we have a Constitutional guarantee of the right of privacy which was held to be overriding in Roe.

The only legal way to ban all abortions is for the Congress to enact a new Constitutional Amendment giving the Federal government the authority to legislate as it deems proper in this matter. It will take, I believe, a majority of Congress plus a 2/3 majority state legislature approval plus executive signature. A process that is very long, very arduous, and one not likely to happen.

 

[gopher]

Re: Roberts Closer to Becoming US Chief Justice of Supreme C

Most Churches, including the Vatican continuously denounce abortions, however their message falls on deaf ears.


A great many churches, ESPECIALLY the Vatican, have also exhorted Bush to desist from creating war but that, too, has fallen on deaf ears.