Las Vegas

Supreme Court abortion hearing raises questions for senators – Las Vegas, Nevada

Las Vegas, Nevada 2021-12-03 03:15:00 –

Andrew Harnik, Pool / AP

Brett Kavanaugh, a candidate for the Supreme Court, will testify in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee at Capitol Hill, Washington, on Thursday, September 27, 2018.

Washington — During confirmation to the Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh gives Senator Susan Collins the right to a woman’s abortion “Reconciled law” He called for a proceeding to affirm the “precedent” that could not be overturned casually.

Amy Coney Barrett told the Senate at a confirmation hearing in the Senate that personal beliefs, including herself, alone cannot revoke the law. “It’s not Amy’s law,” she jokingly said.

But during this week Revolutionary Supreme Court Hearing Even if women’s right to abortion could not be completely terminated over Mississippi law, the two latest judges spoke significantly differently. Question line It is widely seen as part of the court’s willingness to dismantle decades ago decisions regarding access to abortion services.

The severance raises new questions about the content, purpose, and drama of the Senate’s confirmation process, which some say is badly broken. And it’s creating harsh politics for Alaska’s Senator Lisa Murkowski, another Senate Republican who upholds Collins and the right to abortion when the country faces the possibility of breaking the law.

“I support Roe,” Collins said when she sneaked into the elevator shortly after a court discussion on Wednesday.Maine Republicans voted to confirm Kavanaugh Opposed to Barrett’s nomination It’s too close to the 2020 presidential election.

Murkowski refused a corridor interview at the Capitol on Thursday and did not provide any further public comments.She objected Kavanaugh He supported both candidates, Barrett, among the narrowest confirmed candidates in the split Senate.

The court’s ruling on the Mississippi case may not be known until June, but the dropout from this week’s debate must be done by Congress, especially the Senate, as the judiciary is as deeply politicized as any other civil society. Is revived. The constitutional role of advising and agreeing on presidential candidates is better.

“The Senator wasn’t too naive and trustworthy,” said Neil Siegel, a law professor at Duke University and a special counsel for the Senate Democratic Party, including when Joe Biden was a senator. rice field. “I think the problem is mainly that we are deeply polarized. The Constitution goes through the process of nominating and confirming federal judges, including the judiciary, and the political process.”

Confirmation hearings at the Senate Judiciary Committee are fierce, usually days-long sessions as Senators grilling presidential candidates on their approach to law.

The 2018 Kavanaugh hearing exploded in a surprising allegation that Christine Blasey Ford had sexually assaulted her as a teenager at a house party decades ago, and he vehemently denied. Insist.

The abolition debate was central to a confirmation hearing, but Republican Donald Trump could appoint three conservative judges during his presidency and overturn nine courts from centrists and the Liberal Party. Senators were concentrated because of this.

Suddenly, the epoch-making case of Roe v. Wade Planned parent-child relationship v.Casey It became a very real question for American women when Republicans reached their long-standing goal of rolling back access to abortion.

Kavanaugh repeatedly told Senators under the Democratic and Republican grills that women’s rights to abortion had been confirmed.

“The Supreme Court has granted the right to abortion since the Roe v. Wade case in 1973, and has granted it many times,” he told Senator Lindsey Graham.

To Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, Kavanaugh emphasized “the importance of precedent” under a previous ruling, “women have a constitutional right to obtain an abortion before they become viable. There is. ” Questions under the Mississippi method. This will reduce the threshold to 15 weeks.

He beat Collins not on the panel after a guarantee at the two-hour meeting.

But at this week’s court hearing, Kavanaugh read from a long list of proceedings that overturned past cases and wondered why abortion couldn’t do the same.

“If you think about some of the most important cases in the history of this court, the most important ones, there is a series of cases that have set a precedent,” he said.

Mr Kavanaugh said in a hearing that the abortion debate was “difficult.” Perhaps abortion should be decided by the state, essentially ending federal protection.

Senators said judges could simply submit a series of questions and force state and federal lawyers to respond rather than reflect their own interpretation of the law.

However, Senator Amy Klobuchar (Democratic Party), who had a fierce exchange with Kavanaugh and Connie Barrett in the confirmation battle and voted against both, said she had expected from the court.

“I’m not a little surprised,” Klobuchar said.

Barrett told Senator that the Roe v. Wade case did not fall into the “super precedent” category.

But as a conservative Christian, she argued that her view did not play a role. “It’s not Amy’s law,” she told Senator. “It’s American law.”

This week, Barrett pressured lawyers to explain why women can’t simply give up their babies because of adoption, now that safe haven laws are in place in the state. “Why didn’t you deal with safe haven laws, and why aren’t they important?”

When asked about the disconnect between the Senate hearing and the court’s debate, Democratic Senator Richard Durbin, and the current chairman of the Judiciary Committee, admitted that the hearing was limited, but the court said. The decision was withheld until the decision was made.

Since Ruth Bader Ginsburg told the Senator at her own confirmation hearing in 1993 that the decision to give birth was “the center of women’s rights and her dignity,” the candidates have been them. I think he was facing his view head-on. The current standard is for candidates to keep their opinions close.

“You can’t ask for an affidavit,” Durbin said. “My belief is that person, and their life experience is more predictive of the outcome of future events than any declaration made to the Commission.”

Former judge John Cornyn, a Republican Senator in Texas, ignored the differences in what he said at the Commission’s hearing as a reality in politics.

“I’ve seen too many confirmation transformations. People basically refuse what they’ve done or said in the past to get confirmation, but when someone is confirmed, it’s basic. There is nothing we can do about it. ” Conin voted to confirm both Kavanaugh and Barrett.

“I don’t think they are fake,” he said. “I think there is a useful argument, but there are clearly no results related to voting in a different way than what you said at the hearing.”

Source link

Back to top button