Law.com Blog Network

About The Bloggers

Blogroll

In the cross-hairs: Legal abortion

AP reporter Jesse Holland, who has done a terrific job covering the Roberts nomination, notes in his report of John Roberts' confirmation that both advocates and adversaries of legalized abortion are eagerly awaiting some hint of where Roberts' gavel will fall. Holland writes:

"Anti-abortion and abortion rights activists both have their hopes pinned on Roberts, a former government lawyer in the Reagan and first Bush administrations. While Roberts is solidly conservative and his wife, Jane, volunteers for Feminists for Life, both sides were eager to see how he will vote on abortion cases. "

While I certainly don't know either, I wonder whether Sen. Russ Feingold, (the lone Democratic presidential hopeful who voted for the candidate while admitting Roberts had left himself "wiggle room" on Roe v. Wade), will regret that he or his staff didn't take these two items more seriously:

  • Roberts and a Man's Right to an Abortion: Ethan Leib, blogging for Prawfsblawg, excerpts a paragraph from the Bray opinion that Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., asked Roberts about during his nomination hearings with the Senate Judiciary Committee.  In Bray, Roberts writes:

"There are more interests at stake in the abortion decision than those of the pregnant woman. The government has a legitimate interest in protecting both the unborn child and the health of the mother, Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. at 324-325; Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 162, 164-165 (1973); the parents of a pregnant minor have a valid interest in participating in their daughter's decision whether to carry her pregnancy to term, Hodgson v. Minnesota, 110 S. Ct. 2926 (1990); and the father of the child has a personal interest in the pregnant woman's decision. Thus, unlike the condition of being pregnant, the "right" to have an abortion is not a fact that is specific to one gender. Instead, it is a legal right as to which the law can properly assign different interests to various parties. "

  • NARAL Round 2: No Distortion Here:  See what Factcheck.org says about the National Abortion Rights Action League's presentation of Roberts' writings that Roe v. Wade "should be overruled."

Posted by Laurel Newby on September 29, 2005 at 01:44 PM | Permalink | TrackBack (0)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341cce2453ef00d83555254369e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference In the cross-hairs: Legal abortion:

 
 
 
About ALM  |  About Law.com  |  Customer Support  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms & Conditions