Comments on: Sandra Day O’Connor as the Swing Vote

By: tgirsch

tgirsch — Thu, 04 Aug 2005 21:48:18 +0000

Well, it would certainly be possible if Pat Robertson gets his way. :)

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Thu, 04 Aug 2005 17:14:02 +0000

Could it result in a de facto overturning of Roe v. Wade? That's a distinct possibility.

No, it's not. It could indeed result in the de facto and de jure overturning of that gruesome Stenberg case, but that's it. Roe and Casey never claimed a broad right to kill mid-/late-term fetuses to begin with, so overturning Stenberg would not disturb them at all. This slippery-slope alarmism is nothing more (or less) than the abortion equivalent of gun nuts who think even the mildest forms of gun control spell the end of the the Second Amendment.

By: tgirsch

tgirsch — Thu, 04 Aug 2005 16:06:35 +0000

Your assessment of the effect on abortion rights naively (or perhaps intentionally and disingenously) presumes that the anti-abortion movement would sit idly by and not attempt to pass any further abortion bans. Which is, of course, nuts. Would the O’Connor-for-Roberts trade result in a complete overturn of Roe v. Wade? Not likely. Could it result in a de facto overturning of Roe v. Wade? That’s a distinct possibility.

Since the anti-abortion movement couldn’t get a blanket ban passed, they’d just do what they’ve been trying to do — and, to her credit, O’Connor saw right through — and try banning it one method and scenario at a time.

By: ttyler5

ttyler5 — Tue, 02 Aug 2005 04:46:14 +0000

Good riddance! O’Connor was a disaster who compromised conservative values on a number of major legal issues. I am glad she is leaving, and we never want another turncoat judge like her on the bench.