US & World

What Republican nominees said about Rowe Senate Board – NBC10 Philadelphia

In one form or another each candidate for the Supreme Court during a Senate hearing is asked about his or her views on Rowe v. Wade ruling on abortion rights which stood for half a century.

Now, draft conclusion received by Politico suggests that most courts are ready to overturn the landmark decision of 1973, leaving the state to determine a woman’s ability to have an abortion.

Look at how Republican-nominated judges, now a majority of 6-3 votes, answered a question from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee about their views on the case:


Senator Diane Feinstein of California, then the top Democrat on the committee, asked Barrett, “The question is: what’s going on? Will this justice be upheld by a law that now has a significant precedent? Would you make a commitment, would you like it or not? ”

“Senator, I pledge to abide by all the rules of stardecisis,” Barrett replied, referring to the doctrine of the courts. giving weight to precedent when making their decisions.

Next Barrett said she would do it for “any problem that arises, abortion or anything else. I will obey the law. “

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Minin, asked Barrett if she viewed Rowe v. Wade as a “super-precedent.” identify cases so well settled that people seriously do not insist on its abolition.

“And I answer a lot of questions about Rowe, which, in my opinion, suggests that Rowe doesn’t fall into that category,” Barrett said.



Feinstein also asked Cavanaugh: “What would you say that your current position is a woman’s right to choose?”

“As a judge, this is an important precedent for the Supreme Court. By “this” I mean Rowe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. They have been repeatedly confirmed. Casey is a precedent after a precedent, which in itself is an important factor to remember, ”Cavanaugh said.

Casey was the 1992 decision that reaffirmed the constitutional right to abortion.

Cavanaugh went on to say he understood the significance of the problem. “I always try and hear about the real consequences of this decision, as I try to do, of all the decisions of my court and the Supreme Court.”



Senator Charles Grassley was the first candidate for President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court. R-Iowa, who asked emphatically, “Can you tell me if Rowe’s decision was right?

Gorsuch replied, “I would tell you that Rowe v. Wade, passed in 1973, is a precedent for the U.S. Supreme Court. This has been confirmed. Here, considerations of interest dependence are important, and all other factors included in the precedent analysis need to be considered. This is a precedent for the US Supreme Court. This was confirmed in Casey in 1992 and in several other cases. So a good judge will see this as a precedent for the U.S. Supreme Court, worthy of considering a precedent like any other. ”



The late Sen. Arlen Spector, R-Pa., Asked the current Chief Justice, who was a judge of the Federal Court of Appeals, when he was appointed: Caviar is a stable law of the country. ” Do you mean that you were satisfied, satisfied only because of your quality as a district judge, or were you satisfied further? ”

Roberts replied: “This is resolved as a precedent of a court entitled to respect in accordance with the principles of stare decisis. And these principles, applied in the Casey case, explain when cases should be reconsidered and if not. And this is decided as a precedent of the Court, so. “


Samuel Alita, 2006

Specter, who shamelessly supported Rowe v. Wade, remarked during Alita’s hearing that the “dominant issue” was Alita’s “widespread concern” about Alita’s position on women’s right to choose. The issue arose because of Alita’s statement in 1985 that the Constitution did not provide for the right to abortion, Specter said.

“Do you agree with this statement today, Judge Alita?” asked Spectrum.

“Well, that was the right statement of what I thought in 1985 from my point of view in 1985, and it was as an attorney at the Department of Justice in the Reagan administration.

“Today, if the question arose before me, if I were lucky enough to be confirmed and the question arose before me, the first question would be the question we discussed, and that is the question of resolving the view,” Alita said. “And if the analysis was to come out beyond that point, I would have approached the issue with an open mind and I would have listened to the arguments that have been put forward. “

“So you would have approached this with an open mind, despite your 1985 statement?” asked Spectrum.

“Absolutely, Senator. It was a statement I made the previous period of time when I was playing a different role, and like I said yesterday, when someone becomes a judge, you really need to set aside what you did as a lawyer before in your legal career. era and think about legal issues the way a judge thinks about legal issues ”.

Alita was the author of the leaked draft opinion, declaring The ruling in Rowe v. Wade was “very wrong from the start.”


Clarence Thomas, 1991:

The late Senator Howard Metzenbaum, Ohio, recalled chairing a committee hearing and listening to women maimed by “alien abortion advocates.” He said he was “horrified if we turn back an hour on legal abortion services.”

When questioned by Thomas, the senator said: “I want to ask you again, addressing your sympathy, do you believe that the Constitution protects a woman’s right to abortion?”

Thomas replied: “I guess as a child we heard a quiet whisper about illegal abortions and individuals doing them in less than safe conditions, but it was a whisper. It would be, of course, if a woman was exposed to the agony of such an environment, on a personal level, of course, to me it is very, very painful. I think any of us will. ”

But Thomas declined to comment “on the question you asked me.”

“I think it would undermine my ability to be impartially involved in such an important cause,” he said.

Back to top button