News Intelligence Analysis
Gonzales V. Carthart an Abortion Case
The Politics of Supreme Court Nominations
John Nichols
How should Americans react to the U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 decision
to uphold restrictions on abortion that place new and potentially
dangerous limits on access to necessary medical care for women?
Certainly, the great mass of Americans who support a woman's right to choose should be concerned that the court has upheld the first nationwide ban on a specific abortion procedure. As Planned Parenthood Federation of American lawyer Eve Gartner, who argued before the court regarding this case, says, "This ruling flies in the face of 30 years of Supreme Court precedent and the best interest of women's health and safety. Today the court took away an important option for doctors who seek to provide the best and safest care to their patients. This ruling tells women that politicians, not doctors, will make their health care decisions for them."
It is absolutely appropriate to be concerned, frustrated, even angry, But concern, frustration and anger do not necessarily count for a lot in politics.
That is why there is much to be said for the response of People For the American Way President Ralph G. Neas to the decision to uphold the so-called "Partial Birth Abortion Act" that was enacted after Republicans took charge of both the House and Senate in 2OO3.
"Today's 5-4 decision is further proof that the confirmation of right-wing nominees to the Supreme Court has disastrous consequences for Americans' rights and liberties," said Neas. "The replacement of moderate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor with ultraconservative Justice Samuel Alito has brought the Court to the brink of judicial disaster."
The five justices who voted to uphold the ban were Bush appointees Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts, as well as arch-conservatives Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas and the relatively more moderate Anthony Kennedy.
Voting to overturn the act were Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, David Souter and Stephen Breyer.
If O'Connor were still on the court, would the decision have gone the other way? Almost certainly.
Alito is not leaving anytime soon.
But Stevens, Ginsburg and potentially others might.
Neas says, "Today's decision will energize a crucial public conversation with presidential candidates about the importance of future Supreme Court justices."
As usual, Neas is turning attention in the right direction.
Smart, pragmatic choices need to be made -- and that is especially true for so-called "swing voters" and moderate Republicans who support abortion rights.
Alito was not a "conservative" choice for the court, he was a "Republican" choice -- backed even by many Republicans who claim to be pro-choice.
Here's how the announced and possible contenders for the presidency who were in the Senate when the Alito nomination was considered on January 31, 2OO6, voted:
Democrat Joe Biden: Nay
Democrat Hillary Clinton: Nay
Democrat Chris Dodd: Nay
Democrat Barack Obama: Nay
Republican Chuck Hagel: Yes
Republican John McCain: Yes
Democrat John Edwards, who was no longer serving in the Senate at the time, was an early and outspoken critic of the nomination.
And what of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who recently reaffirmed his support for abortion rights? He says: "I could just have easily have appointed Sam Alito or Chief Justice Roberts as President Bush did....I mean, they're sort of a very high standard, and so is Justices Scalia and Thomas. That would be the kind of judges I would look for, both in terms of their background and their integrity, but also the intellectual honesty with which they interpret the law."
John Nichols' new book is THE GENIUS OF IMPEACHMENT: The Founders' Cure for Royalism. Rolling Stone's Tim Dickinson hails it as a "nervy, acerbic, passionately argued history-cum-polemic [that] combines a rich examination of the parliamentary roots and past use of the 'heroic medicine' that is impeachment with a call for Democratic leaders to 'reclaim and reuse the most vital tool handed to us by the founders for the defense of our most basic liberties.'" The response can be passionate but it must also be practical, and it should relate to the 2OO8 presidential contest, as well as races for the House and Senate.
Send a letter
to the editor
about
this Article
This article is copyrighted material, the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Back to The Yurica Report Home Page
Copyright © 2007 Yurica Report. All rights reserved