Andrew McCarthy: Roberts helps protect abortion. Why did you do everything possible to do it?

0
33


A year ago, almost to this day, writing for a 5-4 majority, Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed the constitutional right of a landowner stripped by a local government ordinance to sue for fair compensation.

The owner in Knick v. Township of Scott had not claimed compensation in state court before filing its federal lawsuit. That meant that his federal case should have been ruled out by the 1985 court ruling in the Williamson County Regional Planning Commission against Hamilton Bank. But no, the chief justice reasoned. If the judges upheld that precedent to exclude Knick's lawsuit, they would be raising their own erroneously decided precedent on the Constitution's ban on taking government without fair compensation.

JOHN YOO: SUPREME COURT COURT VOTE: WHAT'S BEHIND JOHN ROBERTS 'LEGAL GYM?

However, on Monday, in June, Medical Services v. Russo, Roberts clung to look decisis, the principle of defending the precedent, in order to protect the supposed "right" to abortion, a general invention of deliberate and progressive judges that lacks a constitutional basis.

There are, of course, four super lawmakers in court: Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan, who vote reliably as a bloc whenever necessary to advance the left's agenda or maintain previously gained land.

Roberts used look decisis as his reason to join them once again on Monday. Together, they denied the state of Louisiana its sovereign power to regulate medical practice in support of its undisputed interest in preserving life.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR OPINION BULLETIN

All five judges relied on Whole Woman & # 39; s Health v. Hellerstedt (2016), in which the court prohibited the state of Texas from implementing a similar law ordering abortionists to have admission privileges at a nearby hospital (in case something goes wrong during the abortion).

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Roberts had disagreed on Whole Woman’s Health because, so poorly reasoned was the decision, he concluded that he was completely wrong. Now, however, he insists that look decisis it requires honoring this precedent of abortion that he knows is wrong.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF THIS COLUMN IN THE NATIONAL REVIEW

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE BY ANDREW MCCARTHY

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here