Senate Democrat Leader Chuck Schumer has slammed Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh on abortion. Schumer says Kavanaugh refused to commit to supporting Roe v. Wade and calling it “rightly decided.”
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on Tuesday that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh wouldn’t tell him during their meeting that he believed Roe v. Wade was “correctly decided.”
“I asked him if he agreed that Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood were correctly decided. He would not say yes,” Schumer said, referring to the 1973 case that established the constitutional right to an abortion and a 1992 case that upheld the ruling, respectively.
He added that Kavanaugh’s answers “should send shivers down the spine of any American who believes in reproductive freedom for women.”
Schumer’s meeting with Kavanaugh came hours after Trump’s Supreme Court nominee met with GOP Sen. Susan Collins (Maine).
Kavanagh may have firmed up his support with Republican senator Susan Collins. She is the abortion supporter who has not yet committed on whether she will vote to confirm Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court to replace retiring pro-abortion Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Collins is concerned about abortion and she wants to know that Kavanaugh will support the horrendous Roe v Wade decision that allowed virtually unlimited abortion throughout pregnancy. During a meeting today, Kavanaugh reportedly told her, according to an account by Collins to the media, that he believes the Supreme Court decision is “settled law.”
According to Collins, Kavanagh told her that he agrees with the comments made by Chief Justice John Roberts during his confirmation committee hearings. At that time, pro-abotion Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter had hoped to get Roberts to commit to regarding Roe as supposedly “super duper precedent.”
Roberts had no intention of falling into Senator Spectre’s trap. So here merely said that Roe is a president of the Supreme Court that is settled law. That can just as easily mean that the law is simply settled for now until the Supreme Court reverses itself by undoing the terrible damage it wrought in 1973 by inventing a fictitious abortion right.
“We talked about whether he considered Roe to be settled law,” Collins said, referring to the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision that established a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy.
Collins said Kavanaugh told her that he agreed with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who said during his 2005 confirmation hearing that Roe was “settled as a precedent of the court.” Collins and Kavanaugh, who serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, met for more than two hours Tuesday morning.
“He said that he agreed with what Justice Roberts said at his nomination hearing, in which he said it was settled law,” Collins said. “We had a very good, thorough discussion.”
The senator has not said whether she will support Kavanaugh, but she has also declined to offer strong criticism of President Trump’s nominee. With Republicans holding a slim 51-to-49 Senate majority, support from Collins and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) would ensure Kavanaugh’s confirmation.
Pro-life Advocates don’t need to be worried about Kavanaugh’s comments or those from Chief Justice Roberts during his confirmation committee hearings. The settled law comments are merely a non-committal response to those who want nominees to pledge to uphold Roe. No nominee can bias themselves during the confirmation process because then they would have to recuse themselves if they took a position when deciding cases on abortion or any other political issue.
Although some pro-life voters are upset with Chief Justice John Roberts for his decision to uphold Obamacare, when it comes to a straight-up abortion case itself Roberts has already shown to be on the pro-life side. Moreover, Roberts has already revealed an inclination to overturn precedent when he voted with the majority of the Supreme Court to overturn a previous decision striking down a ban on partial-birth abortions. By voting to affirm the Congressional ban on the grizzly abortion procedure, Roberts and the Supreme Court set a new precedent that previous president on abortion doesn’t necessarily need to stand indefinitely. That bodes well for potentially striking down Roe v Wade at some point in the future.