I read an interesting (and pretty novel) editorial in the Chronicle Sunday about the Republican Supreme Court nominations over the last 20 years and their purported flip flopping on Roe v. Wade. I can't find the link, though will post it if I can track it down. Anyway, the writer proposed the idea that Republican Presidents have intentionally sought Supreme Court justices that would not overturn Roe v. Wade, b/c that is such a unifying principle amongst Republican citizens (overall, obviously not for all republicans.) His idea is that if they removed that issue by overturning the decision, then many people would lose their primary platform reason for being a Republican. I think it's an interesting idea, and probably completely baseless, though I am surprised they haven't managed to configure a court that would overturn the decision. Nevertheless, figured y'all would get a kick out of it.
In order to believe this claim, you would have to believe that the one's we believe to be good would be willing to put politics over the life of an innocent child. I'm not to that point yet.
Hogwash really. What happened is the Washington establishment got to these old farts like Breyer and Kennedy. Every legal scholar on the planet still hasn't figured out the basis for abortion in the Constitution. It is based on the right to privacy of which does not exist in the Constitution. It'll be overturned at some point. It may be reinstituted but not based on the right to privacy. Hey, if someone can argue a real Constitutional basis for abortion, then I'll stop arguing about it. Same with the right to private property which was abolished during the last Supreme Court session. That is in the Constitution but the court rewrote the Constitution.
