Hear, hear! I have for years said that Section 5 of the 14th Amendment gives Congress the power to get rid of abortion once and for all. President Bush better make sure that he names a judicial conservative to replace O'Connor (Miers just doesn't hack it)---maybe Judge Janice Rogers Brown---so that the Supremes don't strike down Hunter's bill if and when it becomes law. But the way that Kennedy has been ruling lately, we may need for President Bush to replace Stevens as well.
While I want President Bush to pick strict Constructionalists anyway, would it matter in this case?
From Post #2 at this thread:
"Would this legislation actually overturn Roe v. Wade?
Yes, it would. Few people realize that Roe v. Wade shows us the way to its own downfall. The key passage, written by the author of the majority opinion, Justice Harry Blackmun, states in unequivocal terms: “If personhood is established, the case for legalized abortion collapses, for the fetus' right to life would be guaranteed by the 14th Amendment." (Roe v. Wade, Majority Decision, Section IX) The pro-life movement keeps trying to make believe that it can work within the framework of Roe v. Wade, gradually chipping away at abortion. At the same time, the number of victims of abortion keeps climbing and well-intentioned laws are struck down time after time by the monolith of Roe v. Wade. The Right to Life Act faces the reality that the wall of abortion is still intact. Roe v. Wade itself offers us the key to bring down abortion, that key is personhood, and the Congress has ample room under our Constitution to define it to include the unborn."