|
|
|
Jewish World Review July 21, 2005 / 14 Tammuz, 5765 Bush's choice was pure genius By Froma Harrop
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |
The Republicans' ideal Supreme Court nominee is someone who
might overturn Roe v. Wade, but won't. That makes President Bush's choice of
John G. Roberts pure genius.
If defenders of abortion rights condemn the pick, so much the
better. Social conservatives will think they won. And when a court ruling
later proves they haven't, Republican leaders can comfort them. So far, all
is according to plan.
Roe v. Wade is the 1973 Supreme Court decision enshrining a
federal right to abortion. If Roe went down, two bad things would happen to
Republicans.
One is that it would arouse America's pro-choice majority.
Religious conservatives say they put Bush in the White House, but actually,
so did a significant bloc of pro-choice women. We speak of the "security
moms" who in 2004 cared more about terrorism than about abortion.
They also never thought the right to abortion was at risk. Bush
has always balanced his social-conservative talk with reassurances that
abortion would remain available. When he urges abortion foes to fight on,
pro-choice sophisticates dismiss it all as background noise.
But serious incursions on the right to abortion would change
that. I wouldn't want to be a Republican politician the day that suburban
mothers learn there's no legal way to end their 16-year-old daughter's
unwanted pregnancy.
The other problem in overturning Roe is that it would send the
abortion issue down to the state level. Republicans don't want angry
pro-choice voters rushing to the polls in 50 states. They should recall
their clever move last year to put a gay-marriage ban on the Ohio ballot. It
was meaningless but did draw more conservatives to the polls, who also voted
for Bush. The trick works for Democrats, too.
Roberts will probably sail through his Senate confirmation. He
combines the stealth qualities of a David Souter, whose views on abortion
were a mystery, with a conservative hesitancy to overturn precedents, seen
in Sandra Day O'Connor. He also appears to be a classy guy.
What does Judge Roberts really think about abortion? Nobody
seems to know. As deputy solicitor general, he wrote a brief urging that Roe
be overturned. But he was just a lawyer-for-hire then, reflecting the views
of his client, the first President Bush.
Then, at his 2003 hearing to become a federal appeals-court
judge, Roberts noted that Roe was "the settled law of the land." He also
said, "There's nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully
and faithfully applying that precedent."
Even if Roberts joined the anti-Roe side, the ruling is probably
safe for now. Most experts see a 6-to-3 pro-Roe majority on the current
court. Should Roberts vote against the ruling, a majority would still hold.
All this doesn't mean that pro-choice groups need not worry
about the evolving court. Anti-abortion activists are busily pushing through
restrictions on the procedure, some of which the court has upheld.
The biggest disgrace, though, is Congress's ban on almost all
abortion services at U.S. military hospitals — even if the woman offers to
pay for them herself. That means women serving in foreign countries must go
to local hospitals, where the care may be substandard and the natives may
not like Americans. Consider: The rich woman in Chicago can end a pregnancy
by walking to a first-rate medical facility, but the American soldier in
Iraq has to fly herself to another country.
Why should Republicans care about making abortions harder and
harder to obtain? Because the easy stuff has already been done. Republicans
may not worry much about limiting the abortion rights of the poor,
foreigners or even U.S. soldiers (most of whom are from modest backgrounds),
but new restrictions would have nowhere to go but up the income ladder. And
the upper middle class would not tolerate them.
Astute Republicans know this. Americans at all income levels
oppose abortion, but the higher you go, the fewer opponents there are. This
is treacherous terrain for Republicans, and Roberts looks like a judge who
would not get them into more trouble with the pro-choice majority.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
© 2005 Creators Syndicate |
Arnold Ahlert | |||||||||||
