So nominee Gorsuch proclaims Roe v. Wade as precedent

[sakinago]

"Judge Neil Gorsuch said Tuesday the controversial Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion is “precedent” and acknowledged the ruling had been reaffirmed “many times.”

Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee to fill the Supreme Court seat vacated when Justice Antonin Scalia died, does not have much of a history ruling on abortion issues, and the contentious subject was one of the first topics broached during the question-and-answer session of Gorsuch’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the United States Supreme Court, it has been reaffirmed…and all of the other factors that go into analyzing precedent have to be considered,” Gorsuch told Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa. “…A good judge will consider it as precedent of the United States Supreme Court, worthy as treatment of precedent like any other.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the first Democrat to question Gorsuch, immediately followed up, citing the importance of the issue since, she said, President Trump “said he would appoint someone who would overturn Roe.”

“Once a case is settled, that adds to the determinacy of the law,” Gorsuch told Feinstein, clarifying his position on precedent. “What was once a hotly-contested issue is no longer a hotly-contested issue. We move forward.”


Feinstein asked if Gorsuch considered Roe v. Wade “super precedent” – a decision that cannot be overturned.

“It has been reaffirmed many times, I can say that,” Gorsuch answered."

Gorsuch to Feinstein: Abortion ruling is 'precedent'

Sounds like another resounding defeat for the anti-abortion lobby.

Providing we can believe him...


See what I mean when I say liberalism almost always wins in the long run?

I depends on how you define liberalism, and it depends on how you define win. Venezuela isn't really winning. Neither is much of the EU.

 

[Valerie]

We get it. You are conceding the Gorsuch Confirmation because you spent all your energies and billions on a FAKE RUSSIAN COLLUSION STORY.
Now you are unprepared to stop Gorsuch from taking the bench.

WINNING.

smoke another one, sparky.

‘Satirical’ Texas bill turns language of antiabortion laws on men

Gorsuch: Roe v Wade is “a precedent of the Supreme Court”

 

[Uncensored2008]

"Judge Neil Gorsuch said Tuesday the controversial Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion is “precedent” and acknowledged the ruling had been reaffirmed “many times.”

Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee to fill the Supreme Court seat vacated when Justice Antonin Scalia died, does not have much of a history ruling on abortion issues, and the contentious subject was one of the first topics broached during the question-and-answer session of Gorsuch’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the United States Supreme Court, it has been reaffirmed…and all of the other factors that go into analyzing precedent have to be considered,” Gorsuch told Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa. “…A good judge will consider it as precedent of the United States Supreme Court, worthy as treatment of precedent like any other.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the first Democrat to question Gorsuch, immediately followed up, citing the importance of the issue since, she said, President Trump “said he would appoint someone who would overturn Roe.”

“Once a case is settled, that adds to the determinacy of the law,” Gorsuch told Feinstein, clarifying his position on precedent. “What was once a hotly-contested issue is no longer a hotly-contested issue. We move forward.”


Feinstein asked if Gorsuch considered Roe v. Wade “super precedent” – a decision that cannot be overturned.

“It has been reaffirmed many times, I can say that,” Gorsuch answered."

Gorsuch to Feinstein: Abortion ruling is 'precedent'

Sounds like another resounding defeat for the anti-abortion lobby.

Providing we can believe him...


See what I mean when I say liberalism almost always wins in the long run?

Relax Ghouls; You can continue sacrificing infants to Molach.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why do you loons cheer legislation that allows murdering the most innocent of all? Freaking ghouls

And yet you don't give two shits about children born to poor parents.

And you know this how? Be specific as to how you know I don't give two shits.....but before you do? We have adopted children.

Now come at me, loon

Do you fully support all government assistance that goes to poor children?

 

[NYcarbineer]

"Judge Neil Gorsuch said Tuesday the controversial Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion is “precedent” and acknowledged the ruling had been reaffirmed “many times.”

Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee to fill the Supreme Court seat vacated when Justice Antonin Scalia died, does not have much of a history ruling on abortion issues, and the contentious subject was one of the first topics broached during the question-and-answer session of Gorsuch’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the United States Supreme Court, it has been reaffirmed…and all of the other factors that go into analyzing precedent have to be considered,” Gorsuch told Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa. “…A good judge will consider it as precedent of the United States Supreme Court, worthy as treatment of precedent like any other.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the first Democrat to question Gorsuch, immediately followed up, citing the importance of the issue since, she said, President Trump “said he would appoint someone who would overturn Roe.”

“Once a case is settled, that adds to the determinacy of the law,” Gorsuch told Feinstein, clarifying his position on precedent. “What was once a hotly-contested issue is no longer a hotly-contested issue. We move forward.”


Feinstein asked if Gorsuch considered Roe v. Wade “super precedent” – a decision that cannot be overturned.

“It has been reaffirmed many times, I can say that,” Gorsuch answered."

Gorsuch to Feinstein: Abortion ruling is 'precedent'

Sounds like another resounding defeat for the anti-abortion lobby.

Providing we can believe him...


See what I mean when I say liberalism almost always wins in the long run?

Relax Ghouls; You can continue sacrificing infants to Molach.

Apparently Judge Gorsuch agrees with me, and not you.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Why do you loons cheer legislation that allows murdering the most innocent of all? Freaking ghouls

Save the emotional drool for someone else's thread. Your post proves that the anti-abortionists have no rational argument against choice.

And, yes, you LOSE with Gorsuch, especially since he's replacing Scalia.

Really?

Well you run with that, Sploogy....

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

Apparently Judge Gorsuch agrees with me, and not you.

Really?

I suspect you have very little grasp of how the law works.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Who denies that it's precedent? It's bad precedent, but that doesn't make it less precedent.

The beauty of having Gorsuch on the supreme court is we are one spot closer to overturning bad precedent

Not gonna happen, you know...the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Not till we get a court packed with originalists

An originalist interpretation of the Constitution in no way give fetuses personhood.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why do you loons cheer legislation that allows murdering the most innocent of all? Freaking ghouls

Save the emotional drool for someone else's thread. Your post proves that the anti-abortionists have no rational argument against choice.

And, yes, you LOSE with Gorsuch, especially since he's replacing Scalia.

Really?

Well you run with that, Sploogy....

What do you believe Scalia's view on Roe v Wade was?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Why do you loons cheer legislation that allows murdering the most innocent of all? Freaking ghouls

Seig Heil! Adolph!

Hitler, like you, was a BIG fan of abortion. He wanted to slaughter ALL the inferiors.

 

[Uncensored2008]

What do you believe Scalia's view on Roe v Wade was?

Irrelevant.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"Judge Neil Gorsuch said Tuesday the controversial Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion is “precedent” and acknowledged the ruling had been reaffirmed “many times.”

Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee to fill the Supreme Court seat vacated when Justice Antonin Scalia died, does not have much of a history ruling on abortion issues, and the contentious subject was one of the first topics broached during the question-and-answer session of Gorsuch’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the United States Supreme Court, it has been reaffirmed…and all of the other factors that go into analyzing precedent have to be considered,” Gorsuch told Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa. “…A good judge will consider it as precedent of the United States Supreme Court, worthy as treatment of precedent like any other.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the first Democrat to question Gorsuch, immediately followed up, citing the importance of the issue since, she said, President Trump “said he would appoint someone who would overturn Roe.”

“Once a case is settled, that adds to the determinacy of the law,” Gorsuch told Feinstein, clarifying his position on precedent. “What was once a hotly-contested issue is no longer a hotly-contested issue. We move forward.”


Feinstein asked if Gorsuch considered Roe v. Wade “super precedent” – a decision that cannot be overturned.

“It has been reaffirmed many times, I can say that,” Gorsuch answered."

Gorsuch to Feinstein: Abortion ruling is 'precedent'

Sounds like another resounding defeat for the anti-abortion lobby.

Providing we can believe him...


See what I mean when I say liberalism almost always wins in the long run?

Somebody better go look up what precedent means. In this case yes RvW is precedent. As were many laws right up until they changed. Five of nine SC judges can make a new precedent with a single ruling throwing out the old precedent.

lol, so there's one vote for the idea that Gorsuch is simply being deceitful or dishonest in his characterization of Roe.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why do you loons cheer legislation that allows murdering the most innocent of all? Freaking ghouls

Seig Heil! Adolph!

Hitler, like you, was a BIG fan of abortion. He wanted to slaughter ALL the inferiors.

Abortion was against the law in Nazi Germany.

 

[Valerie]

personhood law is the most ridiculous NON conservative notion ever.


trust families, not government!

 

[NYcarbineer]

What do you believe Scalia's view on Roe v Wade was?

Irrelevant.

What do you believe Scalia's view on Roe v Wade was?

Irrelevant.

You responded to this:

"And, yes, you LOSE with Gorsuch, especially since he's replacing Scalia."

 

[Valerie]

Hitler, like you, was a BIG fan of abortion. He wanted to slaughter ALL the inferiors.

don't worry, scumbag.. gorsuch will defend your right to be an inferior asshole bigot.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[


Abortion was against the law in Nazi Germany.

False.

Abortion for ARYAN women was prohibited,. For others it was the demcrat dream, it was forced.

Forced abortions and medical experiments: Last survivors of Nazi women's camp tell their horror stories | Books | DW.COM | 25.01.2016

But your Fuhrer thanks you for lying.

 

[Mac1958]

Who denies that it's precedent? It's bad precedent, but that doesn't make it less precedent. The beauty of having Gorsuch on the supreme court is we are one spot closer to overturning bad precedent

Not gonna happen, you know...the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

I think it's possible that Roe would be upheld even if Kennedy or Ginsburg retires. There's no guarantee Gorsuch would go for it, and I'm not convinced that Roberts would, either.
.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

You responded to this:

"And, yes, you LOSE with Gorsuch, especially since he's replacing Scalia."

Abortion is not a highly contested issue. Abortion is not the only issue facing the nation.

You ghouls care about nothing else (hence the Gorsuch reply) but it is in fact a minor concern under the circumstances.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I think it's possible that Roe would be upheld even if Kennedy or Ginsburg retires. There's no guarantee Gorsuch would go for it, and I'm not convinced that Roberts would, either.
.

Overturning Roe is unlikely, too much case law. (which is what Gorsuch actually said, despite the inability of the left to grasp it.) When Ginsburg goes to her just rewards in the fires of hell (may it be soon) there could well be significant modification to the law that the SCOTUS wrote. ROE is seriously flawed, as laws go.