WASHINGTON ( Associated Press) — In some form or another, every Supreme Court nominee during a Senate hearing in Roe v. Wade about her views on the abortion-rights decision that has stood for half a century.
Now, a draft opinion obtained by Politico shows that a court majority is set to overturn the landmark 1973 ruling, leaving it to the states to determine a woman’s ability to have an abortion.
Here’s a look at how Republican-nominated justices, now a 6-3 majority, reacted when asked by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee for their views on the matter:
Diane Feinstein of California, then the committee’s top Democrat, asked Barrett: “So the question comes, what happens? Will this justice support a law that now has enough precedent? Will you commit yourself? whether you will or not?”
“Senator, what I will commit is that I will abide by all the rules of stare,” replied Barrett, referring to the principle the courts value precedent when making their decisions.
Barrett went on to say that she would do this “for any issue, abortion or anything else.” I will follow the law.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Min., asked Barrett if he was in Roe v. Wade as a “super example”. Barrett responded that the way the term is used in “scholarship” and the way he used it in an article was to define matters so well that people were seriously tempted to cancel it. Do not insist.
“And I’m answering a lot of questions about Roe, which I think shows that Roe doesn’t fall into that category,” Barrett said.
It was Feinstein who also asked Kavanaugh, “What would you say that your position today is on the right to choose a woman?”
“As a judge, this is an important precedent of the Supreme Court. By ‘it’ I mean Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. They have been confirmed many times. Casey is precedent on precedent, which itself is an important factor to remember,” Kavanaugh said.
Casey was a 1992 decision that reaffirmed the constitutional right to abortion services.
Kavanaugh said he understands the importance of the issue. “I always try and hear about the real world implications of that decision, as I try to do, all the decisions of my court and the Supreme Court.”
With President Donald Trump’s first Supreme Court nomination, it was Sen. Charles Grassley. R-Iowa, who asked point-blank: “Can you tell me if the row was fixed correctly?
Gorsuch replied: “I will tell you that the decision in Roe v. Wade, 1973, is a precedent of the US Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed. Considerations of dependency interest are important there, and all the other factors that Let’s analyze precedents, they should be considered. This is a precedent of the US Supreme Court. It was confirmed in 1992 in KC and in many other cases. So a good judge takes it as a precedent of the US Supreme Court. Manega, who deserves to be treated as an example like no other.”
Late Sen. Arlene Spector, R-Pa. asked the now-chief justice, who was a federal appeals court judge when nominated: “At your confirmation hearing for the Circuit Court, your testimony has been read to this effect, and it has been widely cited: ‘ Row is the established law of the land.’ Do you mean settled for you, settled only for your ability as a circuit judge, or settled beyond that?”
Roberts replied: “It has been decided as a precedent of the court, which is entitled to respect under the principles of stare judgment. And those principles applied in the Casey case state when cases are revisited.” Should go and when not. And it is decided by the precedent of the court, yes.”
Spector, a staunch supporter of Roe v. Wade, observed during Alito’s hearing that the “major issue” was “widespread concern” about Alito’s position on a woman’s right to choose. Spector declared that the issue arose because of a 1985 statement by Alito that the Constitution did not provide for the right to abortion.
“Do you agree with that statement today, Judge Alito?” Spector asked.
“Well, that was a true statement of what I thought was in 1985 from my vantage point, and that was in the Reagan administration as a line attorney at the Justice Department.
“If the issue comes to me today, if I’m lucky enough to be confirmed and the issue comes to me, the first question would be the question we’re discussing, and that’s the point of staring,” Alito said. . “And if the analysis were to go beyond that point, I would approach the question with an open mind, and I would listen to the arguments that were made.”
“So you would approach this with an open mind, despite your 1985 statement?” Spector asked.
“Exactly, Senator. That was a statement I made in an earlier period when I was playing a different role, and like I said yesterday, when someone becomes a judge, you really have to separate those things. Have to keep what you did as a lawyer earlier. In your legal career, think about more legal issues the way a judge thinks about legal issues.”
Alito was the author of the leaked draft opinion, which declares the ruling in Roe v. Wade “was wrong from the start.”
The late Sen. Howard Metzenbaum, D-Ohio, recalled chairing a committee by “back-alley abortionists” to hear and hear disabled women. He added that he “fears if we turn back the clock on legal abortion services.”
Questioning Thomas, the senator said: “I want to ask you once again, to appeal to your sense of compassion, whether or not you believe the Constitution protects a woman’s right to an abortion?”
Thomas replied: “I think as a child we heard whispers about illegal abortions and individuals performing in less than safe environments, but they were whispers. It was, of course, if a woman had to Having to face the suffering of such an environment on a personal level, of course, hurts me a lot. I think any of us would.”
Thomas, however, declined to give his opinion “on this issue, the question you asked me.”
“I think it would undermine my ability to sit impartially on such an important matter,” he said.