"Settled" Law?????

[Adam's Apple]

Unsettling
By Paul Greenberg, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
March 16, 2006

Nothing is settled till it's settled right.

That's not a legal dictum, it's common sense, mother wit, moral imperative-- whichever description you prefer. It is only lawyers, judges, politicians and such who speak with assurance about settled law, meaning settled for all time, now and forever, beyond dispute or change. So shut up, they explain.

There's a phrase for such certitude, probably several, but the one that comes immediately to mind is from Ecclesiastes: Vanity of vanities!

Those who speak of Settled Law may use the phrase only when the legal question at issue has been "settled" to their satisfaction for the moment, which they tend to confuse with forever.

That's why some on the Senate Judicial Committee kept trying to get His Honor Samuel A. Alito to agree that Roe v. Wade was "settled law." It was a way of getting the next associate justice of the United States to prejudge any cases involving abortion — and commit himself to supporting it.

For full article:
www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/greenberg031606.asp

 

[William Joyce]

Anti-abortion advocates certainly don't see anything "settled" about it, of course, and why should they? Calling it "settled" is an expression of hope, or an assertion of one power over another. Something truly "settled" has widespread agreement and acceptance. Abortion isn't that issue.

 

[SweetBoy]

Anti-abortion advocates certainly don't see anything "settled" about it, of course, and why should they? Calling it "settled" is an expression of hope, or an assertion of one power over another. Something truly "settled" has widespread agreement and acceptance. Abortion isn't that issue.

This statement is controversial: the worse thing the Court could do is overturn Roe v Wade. An issue is only an issue when it is alive, and no issue has been more central in recent political campaigns than abortion. It is the fight that keeps turning out voters; it will not be the end game, whatever that turns out to be once the issue is turned over to the state. Put yourself in Rove's mind and survey the land. Once Roe is overturned, abortion will become a liberal issue at the state level and bring voters out galore. Stories of tragedy about self abortions or illegal abortions and the like will be dragged out every week in front of the public by the MSM.

 

[Adam's Apple]

...the worse thing the Court could do is overturn Roe v Wade.

I doubt this is true. Roe v. Wade was enacted by the court, not the people. The people have never been given an opportunity to say "yea" or "nay" on Roe v. Wade. This needs to be referred to the people to decide via referendum. I can almost assure you now that it would be overwhelmingly voted down. An enacted law says in effect that what has been enacted is in the best interests of the people and society. Roe v. Wade is not in the best interests of either.

 

[SweetBoy]

I doubt this is true. Roe v. Wade was enacted by the court, not the people. The people have never been given an opportunity to say "yea" or "nay" on Roe v. Wade. This needs to be referred to the people to decide via referendum. I can almost assure you now that it would be overwhelmingly voted down. An enacted law says in effect that what has been enacted is in the best interests of the people and society. Roe v. Wade is not in the best interests of either.

My point had to do with the politics of the issue, which favors conservatives. When and if Roe is overturned, the issue will transform into a liberal one and you have to believe that women may trend more toward the choice view. I don't know if anyone knows this, but polls indicate that a majority of people do not favor overturning Roe v Wade (check PollingReport.Com). They do not favor late term abortions and not against a lot of permission checks and they do react to the way questions are posed. I can't recall if any of the results were broken down by sex.

 

[shoooot9]

What the majority of the people think and want is great, but in this possible reversal of Roe vs. Wade it means nothing. In the end, the Courts are going to decide and make a decision. Now, with Alito in office, there is definitely no proposed “settlement" on this pertinent issue. This decision will be modified, scrutinized, and reevaluated for years to come. There is definitely nothing settled about Roe vs. wade if anything it is unsettled and extremely vulnerable for change and given the times and circumstances immediate change.

 

[Annie]

Just the other night, listening to the Democratic debates I heard 'settled law' again regarding Roe. I like this:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/

Rudy on Roe [David Freddoso]

From a reader:

Whenever I hear that something wrongly decided has been a precedent for so long that it must be kept, I ask the person saying that if he agrees that Plessy v. Ferguson should never have been overturned, given that it was precedent for 58 years. Likewise, I also ask if the person would agree that Brown v. Board of Education should have gone the other way, given the great disruption it caused. Oddly, no one I've ever asked has agreed.​

 

[William Joyce]

Point's taken, but...

It says a lot about the National Review crowd that one of their readers has never encountered someone who disagreed with Brown v. Board. But that's what happens when Goldbergs chase out Sobrans.