U.S. SUPREME COURT - In Support of Theocracy aka Anti-Abortion

"Lawyer in a landmark abortion rights case discusses a potential Roe reversal" PBS NewsHour 5/9/2022

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  A leaked early draft of a coming Supreme Court decision suggests Roe v. Wade could be struck down.  The landmark decision established the constitutional right to abortion and the last major challenge to it came in a 1992 case called Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.  Kathryn Kolbert, an attorney who argued that case for Planned Parenthood, joins John Yang to discuss.

 

 

"Former Pennsylvania attorney general who argued against Roe reflects on Supreme Court leak" PBS NewsHour 5/10/2022

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The leaked Supreme Court draft opinion shows justices appear poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, which would result in the biggest change to abortion rights since the 1992 case Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed the right to an abortion with restrictions.  Former Pennsylvania Attorney General Ernest Preate, who argued that case and asked the court to overturn Roe, joins John Yang to discuss.

U.S. SUPREME COURT - Louisiana Abortion Law Case

"What’s at stake in Supreme Court’s Louisiana abortion law case" PBS NewsHour 3/4/2020

Another attempt of imposing a religious belief on others by using statuary law which IS NOT freedom of religion.

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday in a case about access to abortion doctors in Louisiana.  The law in question is similar to a Texas one struck down by the Court in 2016 -- but decided by a different group of justices.  Lisa Desjardins talks to the National Law Journal’s Marcia Coyle and Mary Ziegler, professor and author of “Abortion and the Law in America: Roe v. Wade to the Present.”

U.S. SUPREME COURT - Indiana Abortion Law

"Why Supreme Court ruling on Ind.  abortion law reflects deep division" PBS NewsHour 5/28/2019

The slow march to theocracy, the Bible over the Constitution.

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The legal fight over abortion rights in the U.S. took a turn at the Supreme Court Tuesday.  Justices ruled on an Indiana law stipulating how abortion providers dispose of fetal remains and prohibiting abortions performed on the basis of the gender, disability or race of the fetus.  Lisa Desjardins talks to the National Law Journal’s Marcia Coyle about what the ruling might mean.

"Planned Parenthood: ‘It’s simply not true’ Mo. abortion clinic breaks rules" PBS NewsHour 5/30/2019

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Missouri is part of a recent wave of state laws that would ban abortion almost entirely, sometimes without exceptions for rape and incest.  The state is also making news on abortion for trying to deny its one remaining abortion provider, a Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Louis, its license on grounds of alleged violations.  William Brangham talks to Planned Parenthood’s president, Dr. Leana Wen.

"Anti-abortion group says Mo. Planned Parenthood violated patient safety" PBS NewsHour 5/30/2019

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The national abortion debate is raging with renewed fervor, as a series of states pass restrictive laws banning almost all instances of the procedure.  Among those states is Missouri, where officials are also trying to shutter its only remaining abortion provider, a Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Louis.  William Brangham talks to Mallory Quigley of the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List.

ABORTION WARS - Extreme Anti-Abortion Laws and Roe v Wade

aka 'The March to Theocracy,' government by the Bible.

"With abortion measures, states see chance to challenge Roe v Wade" PBS NewsHour 5/15/2019

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  With the Supreme Court's conservative makeup, more states are implementing legislation that tests the limits of Roe v Wade.  Alabama's governor has signed the most restrictive abortion law in the country, while Vermont aims to preserve abortion rights into the future.  Amna Nawaz talks to The Montgomery Advertiser's Brian Lyman, VTDigger's Anne Galloway, and Florida State University's Mary Ziegler.

SUPREME COURT - States and Roe v Wade

The march to American Theocracy, or religious domination.

"State battles over abortion policy anticipate a post-Roe world" PBS NewsHour 1/31/2019

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Proposed legislation in Virginia that would loosen restrictions on third trimester abortions has sparked outrage among conservatives.  Many pro-choice advocates expect the Supreme Court to scale back abortion rights, and states favorable to abortion are preparing.  Lisa Desjardins talks to Mary Ziegler, a law professor at Florida State University and author of several books on abortion politics.

SUPREME COURT - Kavanaugh on Abortion

"Despite reference to settled law, ‘all bets are off’ for Kavanaugh on abortion" PBS NewsHour 8/23/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  In just 12 days, President Trump's Supreme Court pick will face contentious hearings before the U.S. Senate.  Where does nominee Brett Kavanaugh stand on key issues?  Lisa Desjardins, and CNN Supreme Court analyst Joan Biskupic, join Judy Woodruff to analyze Kavanaugh’s judicial record and recent statements on the politically charged topic of abortion, including whether Roe v. Wade is 'settled law.'

OPINION - Shields and Brooks 6/29/2018

"Shields and Brooks on Trump’s Supreme Court politics, Ocasio-Cortez’s primary upset" PBS NewsHour 6/29/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks join Judy Woodruff to discuss the week’s news, including the retirement and legacy of Justice Anthony Kennedy, a shocking Democratic victory in Queens, and the continued fallout over the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” immigration policy and family separation.

Judy Woodruff (NewsHour):  And now to the analysis of Shields and Brooks.  That is syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks.

Gentlemen, welcome.

Big news, the equivalent of an earthquake, I guess, in Washington, political earthquake.

Mark, what does it mean that Anthony Kennedy is stepping down from the Supreme Court?  What does it mean for the court?  What does it mean for the city, for the country?

Mark Shields, syndicated columnist:  It’s significant.

(LAUGHTER)

Mark Shields:  No, let me just say, God likes Donald Trump, because she has now given him a second appointee to the Supreme Court, something that Barack Obama, in eight years, got two.  Bill Clinton in eight years got two.  George W. Bush in eight years got two.  He’s getting two in 18 months.

Anthony Kennedy is getting encomiums of praise, in large part, Judy, two sources.  One, he was a gentleman.  He was considerate to those around him.  He didn’t — there was no personalizing or polarizing to him.  And that is welcome and refreshing in this Washington.

But the second thing is, he was a liberal on individual rights and sort of social issues.  He wasn’t on economic issues.  He always came down on the side of corporations against consumers and the side of the employer against — the boss.

And he wrote probably the worst opinion, in my judgment, in the history of American politics, the campaign — permitting corporations to make unlimited campaign contributions, and allowing the gushing of water — of money into campaigns.

But he will — he has been a key vote on capital punishment, on a whole host of issues, including gay marriage and ratifying Roe v. Wade.  So, in that sense, the nominee will be to the right of him, and it will perhaps energize Republicans who were not energized about 2018.

Judy Woodruff:  How do you see his legacy first?

David Brooks, New York Times:  Well, first, it struck me that a lot of my progressive friends are reacting like losing Kennedy is like losing, I don’t know, Franklin Roosevelt.

Like, suddenly, they’re all on his side, which is odd to me, because, in most of his decisions, Citizens United and Bush v. Gore, he voted very solidly with the conservatives.

But it shows the prominence of two issues for progressives, which is abortion and gay marriage, and it shows how the social issues really are what motivate people these days.

I would say I would characterize him as a pragmatic libertarian, tended to emphasize individual rights and freedoms.  And so sometimes that went a little — a lot of time, it went a little right.  Sometimes, it went a little left.  But it tended to be an individualistic mind-set, which had some good virtues.

I thought it — in general, it weakened any sense of community, any of sense of, we have a shared nation, because his world view was so individualistic.

Nonetheless, he was just a very cordial man, a very good man to be around in Washington, an exemplar of an old style public servant.

As for the politics, I agree with Mark.  It’s just a total gift for Republicans.  It will unify the right.  It will energize the right.  It will energize the left, too, but more — in the coming campaign, it puts pressure on the people in the middle.

And so Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins on the Republican side, it puts some pressure on them, but I don’t think a whole lot.  They voted for Gorsuch.

Mark Shields:  Gorsuch, that’s right.

David Brooks:  But it puts a bunch of pressure on the centrist Democrats who are running in the red states.  And I think puts more pressure on the Democrats than it does on the Republicans.

(CROSSTALK)

Mark Shields:  Yes, I agree with David.

Joe Manchin in West Virginia, who I think has to be favored for reelection, as a Democrat in a state, Donald Trump’s best state, he won by 42 percent, that is going to be a difficult vote for him, especially if Mitch McConnell, in all likelihood, holds the vote around Halloween to keep attention riveted on the issue.

Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota, a state that Donald Trump carried by 36 percent, Democratic incumbent.  Joe Donnelly in Indiana that he carried by 17 percent.  And Claire McCaskill in Missouri that Donald Trump carried by 19 percent.  It’s going to be a lot of political pressure for them.

Judy, the key to me is, this is a bigger issue, the Supreme Court has been, for conservatives and Republicans than it has been historically for Democrats.

For example, in the exit polls in 2016, the Clinton-Trump race, 26 percent of the Republican voters said the Supreme Court and who sat on it was an urgent vote matter to them, to the point that it affected and influenced their votes.  Only 18 percent of Democrats said it was for them.

So, it’s a built-in emotional advantage at a time when Republican enthusiasm and interest in the 2018 campaign has been sapping and had been draining.

David Brooks:  That may — I wonder if that will change now because this pick obviously puts Roe v. Wade right at the center of our politics.

And it will actually open up something very interesting.  I don’t think it’s — the nightmare scenario on either side, I don’t think it’s probably going to happen.

Mark Shields:  Which is?  What is…

David Brooks:  Which is that Roe v. Wade will suddenly be overturned.

Judy Woodruff:  Yes.

David Brooks:  Because there is a precedent which Secretary — Justice Roberts has maintained through most of the terms — and the Obamacare case is a good example — of saying, I may agree, I may not agree, but what is settled law is settled law.

He has tended to be biased in that direction.  And as we go through the hearings, whoever the nominee is, that’s what they are going to say.  And so they may disagree in principle on Roe v. Wade, but it is — it’s reasonably settled, so they may hedge it or something.  But it — I’m not sure we’re looking at some massive overturn of Roe v.  Wade either way.

Judy Woodruff:  But neither one of you sees any hindrance, anything standing in front of the President getting his choice for the court?

Mark Shields:  Sure, the choice himself.

We have had nominees rejected before because of something that was discovered or and their position.

I would just take one exception to David, and that is, over the last generation, Gallup has polled every single year.  Americans have more — far more tolerant and far less censorious about having a child out of wedlock, or gay rights, or extramarital relations.

But moral acceptability of abortion remains divided exactly where it was 25 years ago.  So it is an organizing and galvanizing issue still to this day, even though I think David’s right that the status quo or precedent works to the advantage of those who would preserve it.

But how about it if it becomes the central issue in the campaign of 2018?  Does that help the Democrats or not?  Does it turn out Republicans who might not have — who might have sat home?