From The Dissenting Opinion On Overturning Roe Vs. Wade

 The following is a small part of the dissenting opinion by Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan:

For half a century, Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113 (1973), and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U. S. 833 (1992), have protected the liberty and equality of women. Roe held, and Casey reaffirmed, that the Constitu- tion safeguards a woman’s right to decide for herself whether to bear a child. Roe held, and Casey reaffirmed, that in the first stages of pregnancy, the government could not make that choice for women. The government could not control a woman’s body or the course of a woman’s life: It could not determine what the woman’s future would be. See Casey, 505 U. S., at 853; Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U. S. 124, 171–172 (2007) (Ginsburg, J., dissenting). Respecting a woman as an autonomous being, and granting her full equality, meant giving her substantial choice over this most personal and most consequential of all life decisions. . . .

Now a new and bare ma- jority of this Court—acting at practically the first moment possible—overrules Roe and Casey. It converts a series of dissenting opinions expressing antipathy toward Roe and Casey into a decision greenlighting even total abortion bans. See ante, at 57, 59, 63, and nn. 61–64 (relying on for- mer dissents). It eliminates a 50-year-old constitutional right that safeguards women’s freedom and equal station. It breaches a core rule-of-law principle, designed to promote constancy in the law. In doing all of that, it places in jeop- ardy other rights, from contraception to same-sex intimacy and marriage. And finally, it undermines the Court’s legitimacy. . . .

With sorrow—for this Court, but more, for the many mil- lions of American women who have today lost a fundamen- tal constitutional protection—we dissent.

Elena Kagan Approved For Supreme Court

The picture above is of the newest Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court -- Elena Kagan. The Senate confirmed Ms. Kagan yesterday on a 63 to 37 vote. Five Republicans (Snowe, Collins, Lugar, Gregg and Graham) voted to affirm the nomination while one Democrat (Nelson) voted no. Ms. Kagan will be the fourth woman to sit on the court.

Hutchison Will Vote Against Kagan

Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (pictured) has announced that she will vote against Obama nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, Elena Kagan. She said, "I simply cannot reconcile Ms. Kagan's sparse record and my concerns about whether she will be an impartial arbiter of the law." She also said, "Her decision on military recruiters while at Harvard gives evidence of her personal views instructing her professional decisions in order to promote a social agenda."

That bit of gibberish, when translated, means "we Republicans are trying very hard to find a reason to vote against Obama one more time." The Republicans would like everyone to think Kagan kicked military recruiters off the Harvard campus. They conveniently overlook the fact that military recruitment actually increased while Kagan was head of the Harvard Law School.

But then anyone who has watched Texas politics for long shouldn't be surprised at this decision by Hutchison. Hutchison has never been an independent thinker (or an originator of much decent and lasting legislation). She is simply there to give Republican Senate leaders another yes or no vote -- whichever they need at the time (and recently that has been a whole lot of no's).

Hutchison has received her marching orders from the leadership (and the excuses to go with it), and that's all her announcement was about. No surprise there.

Big Surprise! - Cornyn Opposes Kagan

Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas), best known for protecting Americans against marriage to box turtles, says he has made a decision about Elena Kagan (who has been nominated for a seat on the United States Supreme Court). He has now announced that he will vote against approving Kagan's nomination.

Cornyn said he opposes Kagan because of her lack of experience as a judge. He was also upset because she wouldn't rule out overturning any recent Supreme Court decisions. He said that made him believe she wouldn't work within constitutional limits (which means she might make a decision he and his right-wing buddies wouldn't approve of).

Of course neither of these reasons were enough for him to oppose any of George Bush's nominations, even though the criticisms were just as valid for those nominations. Cornyn fully supported the Harriet Miers nomination and it didn't seem to bother him that she had no judicial experience. He also supported the nomination of John Roberts -- one of the most activist judges on the court.

These bogus reasons for not supporting Kagan's nomination are no real surprise, since Cornyn has always acted as a puppet and mouthpiece for right-wing dogma. We already knew Cornyn would not support Elena Kagan and why. In an extremely rare moment of honesty a couple of weeks ago Cornyn admitted that Republicans oppose Kagan's nomination "simply because President Obama nominated her."

I guess that moment of honesty was not approved of by his fellow right-wingers, because he is now back to spouting the same talking points as them.

Scalia Defends Elena Kagan

As you must know by now, President Obama has nominated Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the upcoming vacancy on the United States Supreme Court. Even though the Republicans probably cannot stop Kagan's confirmation, many of them are playing to their right-wing base and opposing the nomination. The problem is that Kagan has not left an extensive paper trail so they are having trouble finding grounds for their opposition.

One of the main themes they have developed for their opposition is her lack of experience as a judge. They did not seem to mind that Bush nominee Harriet Miers had no judicial experience, but for some reason they think this should disqualify Ms. Kagan.

But Kagan now has an unlikely defender on the Supreme Court -- right-wing Justice Antonin Scalia. Scalia not only thinks Kagan's lack of judicial experience shouldn't disqualify her, but he actually thinks it is probably a good thing. Here's what Scalia had to say:

“When I first came to the Supreme Court, three of my colleagues had never been a federal judge. William Rehnquist came to the Bench from the Office of Legal Counsel. Byron White was Deputy Attorney General. And Lewis Powell who was a private lawyer in Richmond and had been president of the American Bar Association.”

“Currently, there is nobody on the Court who has not served as a judge --indeed, as a federal judge -- all nine of us,” he continued. “. . . I am happy to see that this latest nominee is not a federal judge – and not a judge at all.”

Kagan Gains Republican Support

President Obama's nominee for the United States Supreme Court has been making the rounds of Senate offices in the last week in an effort to pick up support for her nomination. And it looks like she's been successful, even among Republicans. I expected her to be confirmed, but I must say I didn't think she would be garnering Republican support quite this fast.

She met with Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts). Brown's only worry was whether Ms. Kagan supported the military. This worry sprang from the falsehood spread by his Republican brothers that while at Harvard Kagan had denied the military access to the Law School. But Ms. Kagan seems to have allayed any fears Brown had.

Senator Brown said, "It was the first question I actually asked her because, having been in the military, I had concerns about [her] position at Harvard. It was very clear to me, after we spoke about it at length, that she is supportive of the men and women who are fighting to protect us and very supportive of the military as a whole. I do not feel that her judicial philosophy will hurt the men and women who are serving."

Kagan also seems to have won the support of Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine). After meeting with Kagan, Collins said she had no qualms about Kagan's lack of judicial experience. She said Kagan had also told her that she considers Roe v. Wade to be settled law (which should help settle the fears of some liberals, too). Collins said she didn't see any "extraordinary circumstances" that would cause her to support a filibuster against Kagan's confirmation.

But while it is nice (and probably necessary) to have the support of these Republican senators, the most high-profile Republican support came from outside Washington. Laura Bush has announced that she supports Kagan's nomination.

Mrs. Bush said, "I think it's great. I'm really glad that there will be three [women] if she's confirmed. I like to have women on the Supreme Court. I think it does make a difference. And you know, I just like women to be represented in all parts of American political and civic life."

I would say that things are looking pretty favorable for Kagan's confirmation. I still expect many Republicans to raise as much of a ruckus as they can about the nomination, but they'll just be shouting into a high wind -- a wind that will sweep Elena Kagan onto the Supreme Court.