The latest Supreme Court ruling on Louisiana's abortion law is a prime example of Justice John Roberts' knee-bending tendencies when pressured by liberal politicians and mainstream media, the Tuesday said. President of the Judicial Crisis Network, Carrie Severino.
In an interview on "Fox & Friends" with host Brian Kilmeade, Severino said Monday's 5-4 decision labeling the law, which requires abortionists to have hospital admission privileges, as unconstitutional was especially "frustrating" because Roberts contradicted himself.
SUPREME COURT DEFEATS THE LAW OF LOUISIANA ON RESTRICTIONS OF THE ABORTION CLINIC
"Yes, this is a frustrating decision, especially since the chief justice of the Supreme Court only four years ago ruled that this type of law was, in fact, constitutional. And he claims that it remains in that position," he said. "But nonetheless, (he) ruled yesterday against the law and, as Judge Thomas noted, this case should not even be in court."
June Medical Services LLC v. Russo is remarkably similar to a Texas law that the court ruled was unconstitutional in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt 2016. Roberts had dissented in the 2016 case and said in a concurring opinion that while he still believes that the past case was wrongly decided, he was failing with the majority in the present case due to a court precedent.
"The legal doctrine of stare decisis requires us, in the absence of special circumstances, to treat similar cases equally," wrote Roberts. "Louisiana law imposes a burden on abortion access as severe as that imposed by Texas law, for the same reasons. Therefore, Louisiana law cannot be sustained under our precedents."
Severino noted that, in this case, Roberts and the court "appear to have made an exception for abortion."
"Well, unfortunately, it has become less and less surprising when the chief justice, in these high-profile cases, deviates from his legal position," he told Kilmeade, citing a recent ruling on Deferred Action for Arrivals in the Childhood. (DACA) program where Roberts seemed to have changed sides.
"When you look at some of the political pressure being put on him, it looks like on the one hand, he promised to call balls and punches (and) at the same time, he seems to be under a lot of pressure when he thinks the court is going to be criticized for the mainstream media, by the elites. He tends to withdraw and doesn't want to make those difficult decisions, "Severino said. "That is a real concern and, unfortunately, it is a pattern."
CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP
According to Severino, who was the secretary of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Roberts did not have to repeal the established law to find in Louisiana's favor.
"You could have distinguished that case. You could have simply said:" the clinics are not the right ones to present this type of argument. "Instead, the president of the court voted with the liberals to defend a law that he recognizes is not unconstitutional" he concluded.