In 1973, the United States Supreme Court legalized abortion in the case of Roe v. Wade. In that decision, the Court basically said that a woman could have an abortion with few restrictions until the point of viability (24 weeks).
Over the years, the Court has changed but the majority has continued to reaffirm the basic decision. However, the Court has also approved restrictions on the abortion procedure. For example, they have declared that state legislatures can impose “parental consent” laws, that 24 hour waiting periods are constitutional and they have outlawed the “partial birth abortion” procedure. Still, at this point, on the basic issue of legal abortion, the count is 6 in favor and 3 against.
Now, some pro-choice groups argue that the score is really 5 in favor of legal abortion and 4 against because they count Justice Kennedy as a swing vote. That may be true. I am no constitutional law scholar. On the other hand, it could be fundraising hype. You know, scare folks so they’ll send money.
No matter what headcount you believe, the pro-choice movement could be in trouble, even though we have a pro-choice President.
As you have heard, Justice John Stevens has announced that he is resigning from the court. Stevens has been a solid pro-choice vote. President Obama will soon nominate a new justice to fill that slot.
Here’s the problem. In the past, Presidents have nominated justices thinking they had a particular ideology, only to find out later that the opposite was true. Justice Stevens was nominated by Republican President Gerald Ford and was considered a Republican himself. Well, he turned out to be one of the most liberal justices on the court. Unless that nominee has a long history of legal decisions, it is often hard to know what to predict.
On the other hand, if Obama nominated a clear pro-choice justice (like Diane Wood), then the pro-life groups and others would be up in arms. And, while a filibuster is rarely used when it comes to Supreme Court nominees, the tone on Capitol Hill is anything but normal these days.
So, to avoid a possible confrontation, Obama might nominate someone who is not as clear on the issue. And who the hell knows what could happen after that?
Stay tuned.

April 12, 2010 at 8:29 am
Pat, I get so uplifted by some of your posts. You’re probably way off the mark, here, but I can’t stop being happy anyway.
LikeLike
April 12, 2010 at 10:21 am
I really dont think i’m off the mark on this one, John. If Obama nominates a clearly pro-choice justice, there’s gonna be a war in the Senate. So, he’ll nominate someone and keep his fingers crossed.
LikeLike
April 12, 2010 at 12:09 pm
So, the President, needs to nominate somebody to fill the seat… Oh well!!!! If there was a republican (arghhh) as our president and he was to choose a pro-life to the warm seat, we all would hate him and curse and whatever else, BUT because MY PRESIDENT is black and he is trying to make OUR United States get off of the whole that the last president left us in, HE needs to be careful with his choice not to loose votes or whatever is on the list for him to achieve.
Listen pro-life people, ABORTION is a particular matter, that FOR SURE a lot of the pro-life has done but because their own regrets they decided to go against it now… Live the President alone, he will do mistakes of course, he is human, and let’s not forget that he is black on his color only, because besides that, if you hold his hand and look into the shadow of it you won’t see color, just a DARK shadow of his and your hand… Unfortunately people often made this horrible mistake of judging a person by its color, race or religion, WAKE UP… we are now in 2010 and what in 1900 was made by a phone-gram we now do by e-mail… and 100 years from now God only nows what will be… so yes abortion in some cases are horrible, should NOT be free in my concept, but it is far from being wrong…
CAN WE CURE WITH HATE?
LikeLike
April 12, 2010 at 12:35 pm
You last sentence, Sonia, would make a great bumper sticker!
LikeLike
April 12, 2010 at 4:01 pm
President Obama could nominate the Pope for the Supreme Court, and the Republicans would filibuster it. I don’t think their stance on abortion is going to be nearly as significant as their stance on how willing they’ll be to let business take over the government (look at the “corporations can buy candidates” decree).
AS Thomas Franks points out in his book, “The Wrecking Crew,” the Republican Party, now in the chains of neo-conservatism, cultivates fear and hate to mobilize its base. Sonia’s bumper sticker is a good one.
Of course, it pays them to keep people fearful of and hating abortion, so it’ll be as close to a bete noire as they can make it
LikeLike
April 13, 2010 at 8:01 am
On the other hand, the Republicans have to be careful about a filibuster. Internally, they are getting a little concerned about how the country is taking their “party of no” image. Now, if Obama nominated the head of Planned Parenthood to the court, they would filibuster. But they do have to be a little careful. And so does Obama. Very tricky.
LikeLike
April 14, 2010 at 7:56 am
Pat Richards, you are absolutely my favorite person to listen to (please don’t broadcast this, either).
LikeLike
April 14, 2010 at 12:28 pm
Your secret is safe with me….
LikeLike