Alito Argued to Overturn Roe in 1985 Memo

[rick_reno]

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/23/D8EM0U180.html

WASHINGTON - Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito wrote in a June 1985 memo that the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion should be overturned.

In a recommendation to the solicitor general on filing a friend-of- court brief, Alito said that the government "should make clear that we disagree with Roe v. Wade and would welcome the opportunity to brief the issue of whether, and if so to what extent, that decision should be overruled."

The June 3, 1985 document was one of 45 released by the National Archives on Friday. A total of 744 pages were made public.

 

[pcf]

I can't stand that Alito Nut-case, he has no respect for the 4th amendment, which clearly states the right to murder unborn children shall not be infringed.

 

[boofus]

Oh well. Too bad for the lefties. You want to make SCOTUS nominations, TRY WINNING ELECTIONS.

 

[Sindawe]

IBTL

This won't last long...

 

[rick_reno]

This won't last long...

I hope you're right. I'd really like to see this guy confirmed.

 

[Standing Wolf]

You want to make SCOTUS nominations, TRY WINNING ELECTIONS.

We should probably specify that they should try winning elections in voting booths; otherwise, they'll just do the 2000 Liar Gore endless fake recount again.

 

[ARperson]

On a purely legal framework, it should be overturned. The federal government has no jurisdiction over this kind of decision. Check the Constitution...all those powers not granted to the federal government belong to the states, individual.

This is a vote for the states. Period.

Personal feeling aside, I never understood how one state (as dictated by the fed. gov.) could allow for the murder of the unborn, yet turn around and charge a person with 2 counts of murder for killing a woman who was pregnant.

But then logic never played a role in hedonism or selfishness.

 

[Faithless]

Well thats all well and good for 1985 but this is 20 years along the line. And I've got a feeling we're all going to be donkey punched by a RINO who gives out token judgements to the religious right. Hoorey for life appointments.

 

[1911 guy]

Balance again!?

Well, I'm tired of judges both at circuit and SCOTUS who hand out judgements pandering to the extremist left. Hooray for life appointments.

 

[TheEgg]

On a purely legal framework, it should be overturned.

Concur -- no matter what you think the public policy should be vis-a-vis abortion, Roe v. Wade was a steaming pile as a legal decision. It was a court that wanted to reach a particular decision, could find no constitutional way to do so, and therfore made one up out of whole cloth.

 

[22-rimfire]

I'm no lawyer and have no idea whether or Roe vs Wade was constitutional or if the Supreme Court had any right to make that decision. I feel Alito will be confirmed and he will balance out the court to a more moderate position on "writing legislation from the bench". I want the court to interpret the Constitution conservatively. Congress should make the laws. The whole system was designed for it. That is why we vote for them and not the Supreme Court appointees. But we do vote for the people who review and approve the Supreme Court nominations by a majority vote. Let them vote for it UP or DOWN. The rest is just politics.

If you believe in murder, then let your state vote in a law which allows abortion. I believe that women do not have the right to make THIS choice unless they are in danger of death due to the pregnancy. "Life is like a box of chocolates, you just never know what you're going to get." ....Another Einstein or an idiot.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

We have learned from bitter experience that discussions of abortion, religion and sexual orientation often degenerate into less-than-polite arguments or claims that "my God is better than your God". For this reason, we do not discuss such subjects on THR, and any threads dealing primarily with these subjects will be closed or deleted immediately.