Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Former Justice O'Connor Subtly Criticizes Partial-Birth Abortion Ruling
LifeNews ^ | May 22, 2007 | Steven Ertelt

Posted on 05/22/2007 10:41:00 PM PDT by monomaniac

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Sandra Day O'Connor is no longer on the Supreme Court but that doesn't mean the pro-abortion judge can't use her influence to try to shape its decisions. In an interview with Fox News, the ex-justice offered a hidden rebuke to the Supreme Court members for their recent decision upholding the federal partial-birth abortion ban.

The high court's decision overturned her opinion in a similar 2000 case regarding a Nebraska partial-birth abortion ban.

In the 2000 case, O'Connor wrote for the 5-4 majority saying the state's ban on the three-day-long abortion procedure was unconstitutional because it lacked a health exception -- even though medical groups confirm there is no reason to have the abortion to protect the mother's life or health.

President Bush nominated and the Senate confirmed Justice Samuel Alito, who sided with the four members of the minority in the previous case to uphold the federal ban as constitutional. The new majority indicated the health exception is not necessary and that the ban can be enforced.

But O'Connor argues that the high court's ruling on the issue “shouldn't change just because the faces on the court have changed.”

"Obviously, that is a concern," she said, responding to a question that the court was basing its decisions "more on politics than principle."

O'Connor also condemned the actions of some pro-life members of Congress regarding judges.

"And in the Congress of the United States, there were resolutions to impeach judges for the outcome of the Terri Schiavo case," she said. "I mean, these are things that go beyond just saying some judge reached an erroneous decision. Removal from office is a kind of sanction, I think."

To continue her influence in the judicial arena, O'Connor announced that she is creating a web site for teenagers that would "instill respect" for the court's power to protect individual freedom, which, in O'Connor's mind, includes the freedom to have an abortion.

At the same time O'Connor seemed to acknowledge the criticism about activist judges legislating from the court.

"I do not remember a time when there were such a broad and widespread range of critics of judges," the former justice said.


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; oconnor; prolife; scotus

1 posted on 05/22/2007 10:41:04 PM PDT by monomaniac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: monomaniac
"Obviously, that is a concern," she said, responding to a question that the court was basing its decisions "more on politics than principle."

That's rich coming from her.
2 posted on 05/22/2007 10:44:26 PM PDT by Jaysun (It's like people who hate corn bread and hate anchovies, but love cornchovie bread.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

ZZZZZZZZZ you immoral has been.


3 posted on 05/22/2007 10:45:27 PM PDT by FormerACLUmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

Ex-Supreme Court Justice O’Connor Bashes Pro-Life Advocates

Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor used a speech at Georgetown University to attack pro-life lawmakers who sided with Terri Schiavo’s parents in their efforts to prevent their daughter’s euthanasia death. She claimed a Congressional effort to have federal courts review the case was a first step towards a dictatorship.

“We must be ever-vigilant against those who would strong-arm the judiciary in an effort to interfere in ‘end-of-life’ decisions,” said O’Connor. “It is the Court’s obligation to protect the right to terminate life unworthy of life. Those who would impede the corurts in this matter are pushing the country down toward dictatorship.”

In related news, Americans have proved extremely consistent in their inconsistent beliefs about abortion. A solid majority feel that Roe v. Wade should be upheld. Most think having an abortion should be a personal choice. But they also think it is murder.

“I mean, it’s not as if they’re murdering a stranger,” said National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) spokeswoman Etta Young in an effort to explain the inconsistency. “People feel families should have the privacy to decide whether to terminate unwanted members.”

read more...

http://www.azconservative.org/Semmens_05_06_Archive.htm


4 posted on 05/22/2007 10:49:39 PM PDT by John Semmens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

This from a Reagan SCOTUS appointee. She is shameful. I will take Roberts and Alito over her any day. They gave GW the first and only win against abortion by a POTUS. Thank you GW and thank you Roberts and Alito! O’Connor you are pathetic.


5 posted on 05/22/2007 10:52:31 PM PDT by jrooney (The democrats are the friend of our enemy and the enemy of our friends. Attack them, not GW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

And there is a lot of babies blood on her hands.


6 posted on 05/22/2007 10:53:47 PM PDT by garylmoore (Faith is the assurance of things unseen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: everyone

Just shut up, Sandra. You had no business on the Court to begin with.


7 posted on 05/22/2007 10:56:21 PM PDT by California Patriot ("That's not Charley the Tuna out there. It's Jaws." -- Richard Nixon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: John Semmens
“It is the Court’s obligation to protect the right to terminate life unworthy of life. ....”

The Allies hanged Germans with that world view.

8 posted on 05/22/2007 10:58:33 PM PDT by Covenantor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

Good riddance to her.


9 posted on 05/22/2007 11:00:37 PM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac
Alito understands the science and the medicine.

O'Conner understands that liberals can ruin her reputation.

10 posted on 05/22/2007 11:09:20 PM PDT by cookcounty (No journalist ever won a prize for reporting the facts. --Telling big stories? Now that's a hit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

Don’t go away mad Sandra, just go away.


11 posted on 05/22/2007 11:56:44 PM PDT by Wiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jaysun
"That's rich coming from her."

She's just like Carter. Even in retirement, can't keep her pie-hole shut. As though we don't already know that she doesn't like the Constitution and thinks we should be socialist and conform to european law.

12 posted on 05/23/2007 1:02:04 AM PDT by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jaysun
"Obviously, that is a concern," she said, responding to a question that the court was basing its decisions "more on politics than principle."

And right there is the problem. The Court is "supposed" to decide based on WHAT'S WRITTEN IN THE CONSTITUTION--not "politics" OR "principles".

13 posted on 05/23/2007 2:38:47 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

Maybe she can tell us the story of how she was hired as a Legal Secretary...........again.


14 posted on 05/23/2007 3:29:11 AM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Covenantor

It actually sounds like something the Nazis would have said to justify the Holocaust.


15 posted on 05/23/2007 3:34:53 AM PDT by rlmorel (Liberals: If the Truth would help them, they would use it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kstewskis; Victoria Delsoul; Tax-chick; Raquel; Kelly_2000
But O'Connor argues that the high court's ruling on the issue “shouldn't change just because the faces on the court have changed.”

Still scratching my head on that remark.

16 posted on 05/23/2007 3:38:06 AM PDT by Northern Yankee (Freedom Needs A Soldier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

Thank Goodness she was not sitting on the court during the ruling.


17 posted on 05/23/2007 3:40:48 AM PDT by mware (By all that you hold dear..on this good earth... I bid you stand! Men of the West!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Covenantor

Stupid woman doesn’t even realize what she just said... Very sad.


18 posted on 05/23/2007 3:42:49 AM PDT by metesky ("Brethren, leave us go amongst them." Rev. Capt. Samuel Johnston Clayton - Ward Bond- The Searchers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

“three day long procedure”, It takes 3 days?


19 posted on 05/23/2007 4:02:58 AM PDT by Waco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

Sandy Nightmare is one disgusting piece of garbage. Good thing for her that mother didn’t think so.


20 posted on 05/23/2007 4:04:55 AM PDT by eleni121 (+ En Touto Nika! By this sign conquer! + Constantine the Great)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

I am glad this hag retired. Now if we can win next election, there might be a couple more liberal spots open up.


21 posted on 05/23/2007 4:10:37 AM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

She also said she thought it would be unconstitutional to impeach judges. Well, I say impeach her if she can’t take a joke.


22 posted on 05/23/2007 4:14:52 AM PDT by Jim Robinson (Our God-given unalienable rights are not open to debate, negotiation or compromise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jaysun

O’Connor gives old people a bad name.
I think she is unconstitutional !!


23 posted on 05/23/2007 4:56:25 AM PDT by chatham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Semmens; monomaniac

Wow, now that’s an incredible statement: “People feel families should have the privacy to decide whether to terminate unwanted members.”

Is that what our nation has become (at least in the eyes of some)? My life is not protected by the constitution, but by the majority vote of my family?


24 posted on 05/23/2007 4:59:26 AM PDT by rimtop56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte
She's just like Carter. Even in retirement, can't keep her pie-hole shut.

Too bad everyone doesn't look at the old fools and vote accordingly.
25 posted on 05/24/2007 4:36:17 PM PDT by Jaysun (It's like people who hate corn bread and hate anchovies, but love cornchovie bread.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

O’Connor is having trouble adjusting to not being in the spotlight anymore. She should get over it.


26 posted on 05/26/2007 11:34:28 AM PDT by ContraryMary (New Jersey -- Superfund cleanup capital of the U.S.A.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson