We tell our kids to not hang around with liars. Why? You cannot trust a liar to not hurt you. What if the liar is a really important person? Is there a different standard for lying by important people?
In his tentative draft, https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/read-Justice-Alito-initial-abortion-opinion-to overturn-roe-v-wade-pdf-00029504 overruling Roe v. Wade Justice Alito flatly declares the following:
Roe was always wrong from the start.” Roe is a failure logic, text and history.
However, at his nomination hearing Alito said:
“Roe v. Wade is an important precedent of the Supreme Court. It was decided in 1973, so it has been on the books for a long time," he said. "It is a precedent that has now been on the books for several decades. It has been challenged. It has been reaffirmed. But it is an issue that is involved in litigation now at all levels." What conservative justices said — and didn't say — about Roe at their confirmations (NPR 5.3.22) https://www.npr.org/2022/05/03/1096108319/roe-v-wade-alito-conservative-justices-confirmation-hearings. Emphasis added.
Notably absent from this comment any statement about how Roe was wrong from the start.
On September 11, 1991, Clarence Thomas said:
Do I have a personal opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade? The answer is I do not. Lying Under Oath? See Supreme Court Nominees On ‘Roe’ Precedent Amid Explosive Leaked Draft Ruling( MSNBC 5.4.22) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPZGJinuKWY
On March 21, 2001 Neil Gorsuch took the uncontroversial line that Roe is a precedent. Precedent is the "anchor of law," he said. "It is the starting place for a judge."
"I would tell you that Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the United States Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed," he said. "A good judge will consider it as precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court worthy as treatment of precedent like any other."
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., asked about a book Gorsuch wrote in 2006 advocating against legalizing assisted suicide.
In the exchange, Gorsuch acknowledged that the Supreme Court had held that a fetus is not a person for the purposes of the 14th Amendment's due process clause, a legal underpinning of Roe v. Wade.
"Do you accept that?" asked Durbin.
"That is the law of the land. I accept the law of the land, senator, yes," Gorsuch replied. What conservative justices said, supra and Lying Under Oath?, supra.
On Sept. 5, 2018, Brett Kavanaugh said
"Judges do not make decisions to reach a preferred result. Judges make decisions because the law and the Constitution as we see them compel the results," he said in his opening remarks.
In a private meeting between Kavanaugh and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who said the nominee had told her he considered Roe to be "settled law" and reaffirmed over the past 45 years. Id.
Finally on Amy Coney Barrett on Oct 13, 2020 said
In answer to questions by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., who asked if Barrett considered Roe to be a "super-precedent."
Barrett answered by defining super-precedent as "cases that are so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling."
"And I'm answering a lot of questions about Roe, which I think indicates that Roe doesn't fall in that category," she said.
"Roe is not a super-precedent because calls for its overruling have never ceased. But that doesn't mean that Roe should be overruled. It just means that it doesn't fall in the small handful of cases like Marbury v. Madison and Brown v. Board that no one questions anymore," she added.
The issue here is not what you think of Roe. The issue is what you think of government officials who lie to further their own agenda. As stated in the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct, SCR 60:
Our legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent judiciary will interpret and apply the laws that govern us. The role of the judiciary is central to American concepts of justice and the rule of law. Intrinsic to all provisions of this Code are the precepts that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in our legal system.
That is the damage to the legal system: a loss in the confidence in the legal system. “The judiciary cannot exist without the trust and confidence of the people. Judges must, therefore, be accountable to legal and ethical standards.” David J. Sachar, Judicial Misconduct and Public Confidence in the Rule of Law (UNODC Aug. 2019) https://www.unodc.org/dohadeclaration/en/news/2019/08/judicial-misconduct-and-public-confidence-in-the-rule-of-law.html. “A judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.” Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all Activities, Code of Conduct for United States Judges, https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges
In his tentative draft, https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/read-Justice-Alito-initial-abortion-opinion-to overturn-roe-v-wade-pdf-00029504 overruling Roe v. Wade Justice Alito flatly declares the following:
Roe was always wrong from the start.” Roe is a failure logic, text and history.
However, at his nomination hearing Alito said:
“Roe v. Wade is an important precedent of the Supreme Court. It was decided in 1973, so it has been on the books for a long time," he said. "It is a precedent that has now been on the books for several decades. It has been challenged. It has been reaffirmed. But it is an issue that is involved in litigation now at all levels." What conservative justices said — and didn't say — about Roe at their confirmations (NPR 5.3.22) https://www.npr.org/2022/05/03/1096108319/roe-v-wade-alito-conservative-justices-confirmation-hearings. Emphasis added.
Notably absent from this comment any statement about how Roe was wrong from the start.
On September 11, 1991, Clarence Thomas said:
Do I have a personal opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade? The answer is I do not. Lying Under Oath? See Supreme Court Nominees On ‘Roe’ Precedent Amid Explosive Leaked Draft Ruling( MSNBC 5.4.22) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPZGJinuKWY
On March 21, 2001 Neil Gorsuch took the uncontroversial line that Roe is a precedent. Precedent is the "anchor of law," he said. "It is the starting place for a judge."
"I would tell you that Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the United States Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed," he said. "A good judge will consider it as precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court worthy as treatment of precedent like any other."
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., asked about a book Gorsuch wrote in 2006 advocating against legalizing assisted suicide.
In the exchange, Gorsuch acknowledged that the Supreme Court had held that a fetus is not a person for the purposes of the 14th Amendment's due process clause, a legal underpinning of Roe v. Wade.
"Do you accept that?" asked Durbin.
"That is the law of the land. I accept the law of the land, senator, yes," Gorsuch replied. What conservative justices said, supra and Lying Under Oath?, supra.
On Sept. 5, 2018, Brett Kavanaugh said
"Judges do not make decisions to reach a preferred result. Judges make decisions because the law and the Constitution as we see them compel the results," he said in his opening remarks.
In a private meeting between Kavanaugh and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who said the nominee had told her he considered Roe to be "settled law" and reaffirmed over the past 45 years. Id.
Finally on Amy Coney Barrett on Oct 13, 2020 said
In answer to questions by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., who asked if Barrett considered Roe to be a "super-precedent."
Barrett answered by defining super-precedent as "cases that are so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling."
"And I'm answering a lot of questions about Roe, which I think indicates that Roe doesn't fall in that category," she said.
"Roe is not a super-precedent because calls for its overruling have never ceased. But that doesn't mean that Roe should be overruled. It just means that it doesn't fall in the small handful of cases like Marbury v. Madison and Brown v. Board that no one questions anymore," she added.
The issue here is not what you think of Roe. The issue is what you think of government officials who lie to further their own agenda. As stated in the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct, SCR 60:
Our legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent judiciary will interpret and apply the laws that govern us. The role of the judiciary is central to American concepts of justice and the rule of law. Intrinsic to all provisions of this Code are the precepts that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in our legal system.
That is the damage to the legal system: a loss in the confidence in the legal system. “The judiciary cannot exist without the trust and confidence of the people. Judges must, therefore, be accountable to legal and ethical standards.” David J. Sachar, Judicial Misconduct and Public Confidence in the Rule of Law (UNODC Aug. 2019) https://www.unodc.org/dohadeclaration/en/news/2019/08/judicial-misconduct-and-public-confidence-in-the-rule-of-law.html. “A judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.” Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all Activities, Code of Conduct for United States Judges, https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges
RSS Feed
