What Judge Kavanaugh Has Said About Roe v Wade, the Constitution and Presidential Power
Articles Blog

What Judge Kavanaugh Has Said About Roe v Wade, the Constitution and Presidential Power

September 28, 2019


“White House experience
really helps refine what one might call
one’s ‘b.s. detector’ for determining when
the executive branch might be exaggerating or misstating
how things actually work, or the problems that
would supposedly ensue from a particular
legal interpretation. It gives you great respect
for the presidency. But that doesn’t translate
into undue deference. When Justice Kennedy
says something, I listen — me and 320 million
other Americans. If confirmed
to the D.C. Circuit, I would follow
Roe v. Wade faithfully and fully,
that would be binding precedent of the court. It’s been decided
by the Supreme Court —” “I asked you
your own opinion —” “And I’m saying,
if I were confirmed to the D.C. Circuit,
Senator, I would follow it. It’s been reaffirmed
many times, including in
Planned Parenthood versus —” “I understand. But what is your opinion? You’re not
on the bench yet. You’ve talked about
these issues in the past to other people, I’m sure —” “The Supreme Court has
held repeatedly, Senator, and I don’t think it
would be —” “O.K. —” “appropriate for me to give a
personal view on that case —” “Not going to answer
the question.” “He’s been one of the most
consequential jurists in American history. No doubt about it. And his basic idea was:
Pay attention to the words of
the Constitution and pay attention to the
words of the statutes that Congress passes. A very simple and
easily conveyed idea. But it shows how far
the Supreme Court had strayed from those ideas
before Justice Scalia came on the scene. The Constitution is
largely a document of majestic specificity
and those specific words have meaning, which absent
constitutional amendment, continue to bind us as
judges, legislators and executive officials. The federal judiciary
is really, as I said, many times — it’s one of the crown jewels,
if not the crown jewel of our
constitutional democracy and it ultimately depends
on getting good people willing to
become judges in our system.”

Only registered users can comment.

  1. I don't like this guy hes a Bush lacky and they've been prepping him for this for decades. Hes a Yale law school graduate. Basically skull and bones Insurgent. We need someone that supports the Constitution not someone who intends to subvert it.

  2. His “BS Detector” must be in the red around his boss. Roe v Wade is landmark for good reason. The right to choose is important. And no amount of conservatives screaming “baby killer” because they don’t understand science wont change that.

  3. This man is unacceptable. He'll find out the hard way the price for being appointed by Trump. He'll be getting phone calls and "suggestions" off the record, of course, very often. He's just another Devin Nunes.

  4. Good men have and will always defend the right to life of the innocent. Always. life begins at conception. Full stop.

  5. They are all liars. Tyrants are created by giving other humans great power over your personal liberty. It's time for term limits for all jobs, say 10 years for any elected position.

  6. He will support Roe vs Wade because anything else is unconstitutional and sets the precedent that the government has control over your body. What would stop them then later on from something else like forcing ‘conversion’ therapies, chemical castrations, or mandatory circumcision on all males for reasons of ‘moral’ or ‘public health and safety’ or some crazy stuff like that? Or mandating that if you’re physically disabled then you’re not fit to participate in society for ‘public health and safety’ reasons…forced institutionalizations for them. I mean it’s a landmark for THAT reason – the government can’t force those things on your person because your person is protected under the Constitution.

    Edit: I thought of another more likely one – implantable ID chips required for every citizen to ensure our ‘security’.

  7. That's what I hate about the law it's all run by men and women who's judgements are based on the political wind. One day abortion is legal the next day it isn't, and this same process is applied on the streets by the police, in the courts by the judges, and in the prisons by the jailers. So that no one knows right from wrong!!!

  8. New York Times Morning Briefing:Here's what you need to know to start your day.1.)Eat shit.2.)Spray propaganda.3.Repeat step one and two.

  9. Analysis:Officials said that 57 children had been reunited with their families. An additional 46 children remain in government custody because they have been found ineligible to be returned to their families for various reasons. – In addition: We employees at the New York Times didn't cared at all for illegal alien children,which did had been thrown under Barrack Hussein Soetero Obama's presidency and under his own order in FEMA concentration camps.

  10. New York Times Analysis:We employees at the New York Times does consuming together with our Zionist and Ashkenazi sugar daddy George Soros tons of psychotropic substances and that is the reason why we are so deranged and that is as well the reason why we New York Times employees does suffering very often under the symptoms of hallucinogenic hallucinations due to the reason of psychotropic substances abuses, and we literally praising the Reptilian crossed-eyed Ashkenazi and Zionist,George Soros.

    New York Times Analysis:Hillary Clinton did had approved with the knowledge of Barrack Hussein Soetero Obama's knowledge and blessings the sell of 20 percentages of fresh and cool Uranium assets to " Muh Russia ".

    New York Times Analysis:We employees didn't sprayed propaganda against Hillary Clinton and Barrack Hussein Soetero Obama for their betrayal for selling Uranium assets to " Muh Russia ".
    #ThePrivilegesOfTheUSDemocratsParty #TheDoubleStandardOfTheDemocratsParty
    #TheTripleStandardsOfTheDemocratsParty
    #InfinitelyStandardsOfTheDemocratsParty
    #NeverEndingHypocrisiesOfTheDemocratsParty !!!!!
    – SAD!

  11. I sincerely hope it is overturned. Roe v. Wade is not a legislative decision. There is no right in any legislative form that grants access to abortions. The supreme court should not be used as a body to enact new law. The 9th amendment merely grants federal protection to legislation that recognizes rights of the citizens. It does not grant a wide swath of protection to whatever you say is a right.

    I agree with abortion, I am pro choice. I'm also a firm believer in balance of powers in our government and this is a clear case where this belief has been cast aside. Go pass actual legislation about abortion and stop whining.

  12. Notice how he refused to answer about his personal opinion on Roe v. Wade? That leads one to believe that his opinion is very different from the "safe answer" that he would follow precedent.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *