by Dr. Virginia Armstrong, National Chairman, Court Watch: America has just celebrated Presidents' Day, a commemoration of the birthdays of two presidents —Washington and Lincoln —who dominate the landscape of American presidencies. The values of these statesmen — values such as "life, liberty, and law" — constituted the foundation upon which America was founded and from which we grew to greatness. But Washington's and Lincoln's values are under savage attack by Humanist/Reconstructionist judges, and no case reflects that lamentable fact more than does Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992).Several of the most critical values of American law and life are torpedoed by the chaotic Casey Court and these radically irrational and dangerous judicial attacks provide more rich material for pro-lifers/Constitutionalists to use as talking points in the 2008 elections and as questions to ask candidates. A superficial glance at this case suggests that the values of Washington and Lincoln won — five of the six abortion regulations of Pennsylvania's laws were upheld by the Court. BUT a closer study of Court's multiple opinions demonstrates that this decision may actually be what law professor Michael Stokes Paulsen called "the worst constitutional decision of all time." Therefore, we continue our "curb the courts" elections strategy with the first of a series of probing talking points about Casey.
1. The court produced one of the most convoluted set of opinions — perhaps THE most convoluted set — in its history. . . .
2. LAW: The Court declared its unswerving devotion to the Roe decision as precedent (meaning, to the Court, prior judicial decisions), but proceeded to gut Roe of its essential core. . . .
3. LAW: The Casey Court, in what appears to be an almost frenzied effort to justify its mess, destroyed centuries of Common Law standards as to why precedents should be over-ruled. . . .
4. LAW: The ever-creative Justices crafted four stunningly vague new standards for determining when a precedent might be over-ruled. . . .
The Casey pro-abortion opinions thus stand for the propositions that the supreme law of the land is precedent (i.e., judicial decision), not the Constitution, and that precedent can be interpreted by today's judges in any way they choose — even to the extent of actually destroying a previous decision (or set of decisions) by re-defining its core. . . . [Read More]
Tags: constitution, Court Watch, courts, precedent, Supreme Court, Virginia Armstrong, Casey Curse, 2008 Elections, Eagle Forum To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
0 comments:
Post a Comment