Kennedy Set to Sell Us Out — Again
SCOTUSBlog says that Justice Kennedy’s vote is in play on the partial-birth abortion cases:
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, proceeding calmly, cautiously and analytically, left the clear impression on Wednesday that his vote may be available to strike down Congress’ first attempt to impose a nationwide ban on an abortion procedure — even though the procedure at issue is one that Kennedy has suggested is morally repugnant.
. . . .
[A]t least during oral argument, Kennedy seemed unpersuaded that Congress either had succeeded in making its ban narrow enough to be upheld without disturbing the core right to abortion, or that, if upheld as written, it could ever be challenged at a time when such a ban would genuinely threaten the health of pregnant women seeking abortions.
Perhaps it will be an occasion for another sanctimonious opinion from Kennedy in which he expounds upon how repugnant he finds the procedure — but that he must strike down the ban because that’s what the New York Times editorial board wants legal principles require him to do so.
It is no wonder that, whenever I am asked who is my least favorite Justice, I reply without hesitation: “Anthony Kennedy.”
The transcripts of today’s oral argument are available here and here. Here is the audio. [UPDATE: That is the audio for the first argument; the link to audio for the second argument is here.] I’ll try to listen to it tonight (or sometime soon) and report back.
I’ve got a simple proposal .. we stop arguing about abortion, just make it go away as an issue. Let the donks do what they want. The problem will solve itself with 3D computer enhanced ultrasound.
Easily the best way to confound the donks take the issue out of play and win the issue in the long run. The donks position was sustainable as long as the joke about inviable tissue mass was allowed to be told to the ignorant, but now, anyone with $100, sometimes even free, can see what is really going on.
Take it off the table. Yes, I know it is hard for some, but buck it up, it’s all about winning from here on out.
No offense meant but technology advances cannot be stopped.
bill (26027c) — 11/8/2006 @ 6:13 pmAh, yes, stare decisis, aka the liberal ratchet.
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 11/8/2006 @ 6:43 pmRoberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito … are we writing off Souter and Bryer?
nk (57e995) — 11/8/2006 @ 6:59 pmPatterico, what positive qualities do you find in Souter?
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 11/8/2006 @ 7:34 pmIf the good Justice Kennedy is not careful, he might find himself principally responsible for the SCOTUS attaining the respect level of Congressmembers (Oh, for the high levels of respect extended to used-car salesmen).
Another Drew (a28ef4) — 11/8/2006 @ 7:35 pmPatterico, what positive qualities do you find in Souter?
Oh, he’s a liberal — but I think he’s smart and more principled. I didn’t say I *liked* him — just that I don’t dislike him as much as I do the sanctimonious, unprincipled, limelight-seeking weasel Kennedy.
Patterico (de0616) — 11/8/2006 @ 8:22 pmbill,
I included 3-D photos of various stages of fetal development in this post.
I don’t think it changed a single mind.
Patterico (de0616) — 11/8/2006 @ 8:26 pm[…] Patterico supplies this link to audio of the argument. […]
The Southern California Law Blog » U.S. Supreme Court Hears Argument on Partial Birth Abortion Ban (d08cdf) — 11/8/2006 @ 9:08 pmYou don’t need to sugarcoat it, Patterico. How do you really feel about Justice Kennedy?
By the way, even though your earlier posts didn’t change my mind about abortion – I was already against most abortion, especially late-term procedures, before I read your series – seeing ultrasound photos like the ones you posted changed my mind about abortion a few years ago. I guess you could say I was for abortion before I was against it, but I’m sure there are many others like me. Which proves once again that a picture is worth a thousand words.
DRJ (1be297) — 11/8/2006 @ 9:09 pmPatterico, I think you are selling the process short. We know several expectant parents and they were unaware of what was really going on in the womb. Once they got photos and video, their whole approach to child birth changed. As that knowledge moves through the population at large the tide will turn — It has already started. If you can’t change the hearts and minds, you will never win.
What I have found is generally amongst the educated, nope not going to have much effect. But as you go down the food chain the effect is greater.
It is like what happened to gun control in the 90s — as a few states allowed their citizens to carry concealed the public became aware of the fact that the nuts were just selling BS. Now 40+ states allow CCW. Some states, you know which, there is no hope for. Those are goners. But for the other 90% it worked.
bill (26027c) — 11/8/2006 @ 9:24 pmNever much into politics until I was older but during thomas, I started paying attention to some of the confirmations (IANAL) cuz the politics were disgusting. My first introduction to actually paying attention started then, as I got a little older I developed a little more nuance.
Anyways, I saw the confirmation of ginsberg and I thought to myself “this woman is flogging crazy” but I now know that I was over politicizing my oppinion on the courts. Ginsberg hasn’t been playing games on the court, she isn’t nearly as guilty of the judicial lunacy that exists in kennedy, and o’connor.
Just saying, Ginsberg actually seems interested and respectful of the law despite being loopy in politics, and I’m very startled, and in fact somewhat appologetic for my initial opinions.
Wickedpinto (d099bd) — 11/8/2006 @ 11:17 pmBut will Kennedy look to international law for guidance? We know that abortion law in Europe is stricter than it is here. Somehow, I doubt it.
sharon (dfeb10) — 11/9/2006 @ 7:37 am