supreme court observations

The next, post-Kennedy Supreme Court will probably find a way to give Roe V Wade — in and of itself, if not allowing for the further state decreed restrictions — a pass.  John Roberts will declare a narrow stare decisis in a 5-4 ruling, before heading over to the concerns of corporate dominance.   Beyond that — well,  as a matter of course, I’d say the recent “Crisis Pregnancy Center” decision — no, they are not required to go against their philosophical mandate and inform women of where the Planned Parenthood is — sounds about right… doesn’t it?

Meantime, the politics of this are fascinating.  Polls show contradictions.  It is this:

62 percent of respondents think the Senate should either confirm or reject Trump’s pick before the midterms.
52 percent of those surveyed said that they hope Kennedy’s replacement on the Court supports access to legal abortion.  29 percent said they hope the Supreme Court’s newest member will reject legal abortion.  About 19 percent had no opinion or said they didn’t know what they wanted.

Maybe they’ve internalized my counter-intuitive forecast?

Hey.  The courts are one reason why Trump was elected — why one parcel of Republicans could go ahead, justify/rationalize/weigh in favor of sticking with Trump.  Meantime, the Democrats’ need to delay until after the election… bring to mind the party’s precarious Senate situation.  The three, or four, vulnerable Democrats over in something oftly termed “Trump Country” may draw straws to decide who off-sets the two wavering Republicans.  And it becomes an irony that the issue, if maybe a little scrambled, that brought Claire McCaskill to re-election six years ago, may just undo her six years later.

Leave a Reply