Update (9/14): Kevin Funnell:
So, John Roberts believes that Roe v. Wade was “settled as precedent.” So was Plessy v. Ferguson. Nice answer, which signifies nothing as to how he’d rule if the right case was presented to overrule Roe v. Wade.
————————————————————————————————
1991 — “We continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled.” (Source)
2005 — The case giving women the “right” to choose to kill unborn babies is “entitled to respect.” (Source)
As I have emphasized repeatedly, this issue presents complex moral and judicial ethical issues. I’m just disappointed (but not especially surprised, I guess, given the politicization of the confirmation process) that Roberts so blithely opted for the easy way out.
Roberts didn’t take the bait. He said that, while precedent is important, new facts and information could provide a basis for the Supreme Court to overturn a bad precedent-setting decision like Roe.
“Whether or not particular precedents have proven to be unworkable is another consideration on the other side — whether the doctrinal bases of a decision had been eroded by subsequent developments,” Roberts said.
As Senator Biden asked questions he was not all that interested in hearing the answer. He constantly claimed that he was running short on time as Judge Roberts attempted to answer.
