It may not be too late to reverse the abortion pill (Mifeprex or RU-486) – call 1-877-558-0333

Wednesday, October 05, 2005

Does Pro-Abortion Reaction to Roberts Spell Trouble for Future Nominee?

On Thursday, September 29 at 3:00 p.m., John Roberts was sworn in as the 17th Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The vote was 77 votes to Confirm with 22 votes opposed.. "No" votes included Sen. Hillary Clinton who, of late has been attepting to portray herself as a "moderate", and a cast of the usual liberal characters: Kennedy, Kerry, Biden, Inouye, Harkin, Feinstein, Mikulski and Obama.

Senate Judiciary hearings opened Sept.12 and concluded Sept.22 when the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 13 to 5 to approve John Roberts. Roberts’ testimony made it clear he will strictly interpret the Constitution, but his opinions on abortion were not expressed.
With two abortion cases coming before the Supreme Court this term, predictably both sides in the abortion controversy want a Supreme Court Justice who reflects their views.

Roberts was nominated in July, after Sandra Day O’Connor announced her retirement from the court. Abortion advocates hailed her as a "moderate" suggesting her replacement should share her views. O’Connor voted for abortion. Sen.Arlen Specter suggested O’Connor might remain on the court if she was offered the position of Chief Justice.

The ailing Chief Justice, William Rehnquist, who was one of the two Justices who opposed legalizing abortion in Roe. v. Wade, was determined to remain on the court but on September 3, Rehnquist passed away. Bush then nominated Roberts for Chief Justice.

Pro-Abortion Attack Ads
In the weeks that lead up to the hearings, Roberts had to endure grossly unfair attacks on his character by pro-abortion organizations like The National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). Roberts once argued a case before the Supreme Court for George H.W. Bush’s administration to support the rights of people to protest at abortion clinics. NARAL responded to the Roberts nomination with a sensationalized ad which attempted to paint Roberts as an extremist who supported abortion clinic bombers. FactCheck.org found otherwise and wrote, "The images used in the ad are especially misleading. The pictures are of a clinic bombing that happened nearly seven years after Roberts signed the legal brief in question." The ad backfired. It was so outrageously unfair that NARAL had to pull it.The director responsible for the ad resigned.

If the pro-abortion crowd has made this much of a stink over a nominee as qualified as Roberts,
(The Senate unanimously confirmed Judge Roberts once before, Roberts received the highest rating from the American Bar Association and graduated at the top of his class from Harvard Law School, etc.) imagine the ruckus they'll raise over the next nominee.

No comments: