Considering Ace's Reconsideration

I feel compelled to note, as many wise people noted during the Alito confirmation process, that "overturning" Roe v. Wade would NOT make abortion illegal. If any future case addresses the viability of Roe as precedent, all it would do is determine to what extent the states may legislate on the issue. Even if the extremely unlikely result would be to allow the states full and free reign in this area, that is all it would do.

Right now, as seen in the federal appellate courts, you can't even proscribe infanticide (a.k.a. partial-birth abortion) based on their reading of Roe and (more importantly) its increasingly confusing and confused progeny.

Insty (among others) has essentially predicted that even if Roe were nullified, most states would still permit most abortions (particularly first trimester abortions), with some regulation. That's probably a fair estimate and in line with where we probably would have ended up had the Supreme Court not stomped all over the issue with Roe et al.

As for the Gang of 14 Deal, if it doesn't hold when it matters most (i.e. when Bush gets to pick a third justice), then it really doesn't mean doodly squat. If it holds under THAT circumstance, then I agree it was a reasonable deal. Frankly, the way things are going now, I think we should go back to the practice (circa 1925 or so) of simply having floor votes on all nomination. All the committee hearings are a waste of time and make my ears hurt.

posted by Harry Callahan at 03:20 PM

| Access Comments