Abortion stirs up GOP tensions in Supreme Court battle
Two rising GOP stars with White House aspirations make landmark abortion rights ruling Roe v. Wade a central part of the looming confirmation battle against the Supreme Court, worrying other Republicans ahead of November.
Senator Josh hawleyJoshua (Josh) David HawleyGOP attacks on Fauci at center of pandemic message Colonial Pipeline CEO toasted over ransomware attack Senate Republicans delay confirmation of candidate Biden OPM PLUS (R-Mo.) Wants to see explicit evidence that any candidate to succeed justice Ruth bader ginsburgRuth Bader Ginsburg Juan Williams: It’s time for Judge Breyer to leave Democrats: Roe’s coup against Wade would fuel expansion of abortion fight on Supreme Court ahead of midterms MORE considers Roe v. Wade as ill-decided, while Sen. Tom’s CottonTom Bryant CottonOvernight Defense: Austin and Milley talk about budget, Afghanistan, sexual assault and more at wide-ranging Senate hearing Cotton, Pentagon chief entangles over diversity training in the military Media continue to praise Anthony Fauci, despite his damning emails (R-Ark.) Said the landmark ruling must go.
It’s an uncomfortable subject for other Republicans, who would prefer to talk about the candidate’s judicial temperament in more general terms.
These senators fear that an explicit criticism of Roe v. Wade won’t provoke a political backlash in the election in less than two months.
The different views become a source of tension as Senate Republicans prepare for a high-level confirmation battle with the highest political stakes.
Hawley, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, a Yale Law graduate and a former Attorney General of Missouri, said President TrumpDonald Trump Trump DOJ demanded metadata on 73 phone numbers and 36 email addresses, Apple says Putin is optimistic about working with Biden ahead of scheduled meeting Biden meets Queen Elizabeth for the first time as president PLUSThe candidate should explicitly express her views on the controversial 1973 decision establishing the right to abortion.
“I want to see a candidate where there is evidence on the record that she understands the importance of Roe and there is evidence to indicate that she recognizes that Roe was badly decided, that it was bad for the courts. “Hawley said.
Trump has said he will choose a woman to replace Ginsburg and a decision will be announced on Saturday.
Hawley says he’s not asking the candidate to pledge to overthrow Roe v. Wade, but “rather investigates basic judicial philosophy.”
“The era of the stealth candidate should be over,” he said, adding that a candidate’s perspective on Roe v. Wade is a “window into the judicial philosophy of a judge”.
Hawley said his first question will be, “Has this candidate acknowledged that Roe v. Wade had been badly decided in 1973? “
Hawley announced his position to his colleagues during a speech in July, when few lawmakers expected a confirmation battle anytime soon.
Cotton, a Harvard law graduate and influential conservative on the GOP Senate conference, has openly called on the High Court to review the controversial abortion rights ruling.
“It’s time for Roe v. Wade to leave,” Cotton tweeted earlier this month after Trump named the Arkansas senator to his list of 20 potential Supreme Court candidates.
Cotton doubled down on his criticism of the historic case on Sunday.
“My views on Roe are well known and they date from a long time ago,” he said. Chris WallaceChristopher (Chris) WallaceLewandowski says Trump hasn’t told him about reinstatement Divisions remain over infrastructure as clock ticks on bipartisan deal Sunday shows – Infrastructure dominates MORE on “Fox News Sunday”.
“I think Roe v. Wade was badly decided because it took that question [about abortion] away from the American people acting through their state legislatures, ”he said.
Cotton said Trump has assembled a list of potential “highly capable” candidates whose “job is not to lay down the law.”
Hawley and Cotton both exploit what their colleagues describe as a high level of frustration among Republican voters over the inability to make serious progress to have the Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade.
“There is no doubt that there is frustration among pro-life conservatives over the years that we have had several candidates who have not lived up to the occasion as they would see,” he said. said Sen. Kevin CramerKevin John CramerTrump dismisses climate change, calls on Biden to fire joint chiefs Putin says Nord Stream 2 pipeline is nearing completion Defense overnight: Senate confirms secretary of the military after snafu | Withdrawal from Afghanistan “slightly” ahead of schedule (RN.D.).
Cramer cited Chief Justice John Roberts’ 2012 ruling in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius to uphold the main provisions of the Affordable Care and Justice Act 2010. Neil gorsuchNeil Gorsuch Gorsuch and Thomas Join Liberal Justices in Siding with Criminal Defendant Supreme Court Justice Denies Colorado Churches Challenge Lockdown Authority Democrats: The Roe Coup v. Wade would fuel Supreme Court expansion MOREin a landmark 2020 case that ruled that companies cannot discriminate in employment decisions against LGBTQ people.
Other Senate Republicans are making it clear that they don’t want abortion to be front and center in the Supreme Court confirmation battle.
“I’m as pro-life as they come, but I just think for the sake of the Supreme Court if a judge shows up out there, you, I just don’t think you’re creating litmus tests.” I think you want a constitutional expert, someone who will apply the law and the Constitution, who respects precedents, ”declared the majority whip in the Senate. John ThuneJohn Randolph Thune “The era of bipartisanship is over”: Senate goes through a rough patch Biparty talks sow division among Democrats Senate passes long-delayed China bill (RS.D.).
“Asking a candidate running for a specific position on a specific issue, when you don’t have a set of facts in front of you, and asking them to speculate or conclude assumptions, I don’t think that’s it. what you want a candidate to do in this situation, ”added Thune.
The fact that a candidate explicitly expresses his opposition to Roe v. Wade is making some Republican senators nervous weeks before an election where their majority will be on the line and female college graduates living in the suburbs are seen as a crucial electoral bloc.
The political advantage of unifying the Republican Party in a battle for Senate confirmation could be undermined if Democrats manage to use it to convince female voters in the suburbs that abortion rights are in serious jeopardy.
Senator Lisa MurkowskiLisa Ann Murkowski The White House has been briefed on the bipartisan infrastructure deal, but says questions remain. Biparty Senate Group Announces Infrastructure Deal The Hill’s Morning Report – Featured by Facebook – Biden Mission Abroad: Rewarding Friends, Coercing Opponents MORE (R-Alaska), a decisive vote that opposed his party launching a Supreme Court confirmation process so close to the election, said a candidate should not be forced to vote on Roe v . Wade.
“Any judge who would say that… if he would say, ‘I think Roe v. Wade should be canceled ”, I think that disqualifies them. It’s not just abortion. It’s about anything that could be pending in court like that, ”she said.
“That’s why you see candidates when they come before the Judiciary Committee that they answer many of these questions in a way that frustrates the members and frustrates the public,” she noted.
It has become a repetitive ritual in recent Supreme Court confirmation hearings for senators to use various tactics to get a candidate’s perspective on a high-profile issue that could go to court and for the candidate. to decline to comment because expressing a point of view could interfere with his or her future ability to chair a case.
It’s a defense that was memorably made by Ginsburg during his own confirmation hearing 27 years ago.
For example, Sen. Diane FeinsteinDianne Emiel Feinstein “If This Thing Qualifies, I’m Toasted”: An Oral History of Gray Davis’ California Recall (D-Calif.) Asked the then candidate Brett KavanaughBrett Michael KavanaughGorsuch and Thomas join Liberal justices in siding with criminal defendant Alyssa Milano, says she could “potentially run” for House in 2024 Defense overnight: Supreme Court refuses to hear case challenging the men’s only bill | Drone refuels Navy fighter jet for the first time | NATO chief meets Austin, Biden MORE in 2018 whether a sitting president might be required to respond to a subpoena.
Kavanaugh responded by invoking the Ginsburg standard.
“Regarding the canons of judicial independence, I cannot give you an answer to this hypothetical question,” he said.