It wasn’t entirely clear exactly what Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) was trying to accomplish — given that Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation hinges on the support of two GOP senators who support abortion rights — but in his round of questioning Wednesday, Graham made an extended case for why some believe Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion nationwide, is bad law.
“Whether you agree with Roe v. Wade or not, the reason some legal scholars object to this concept is breathtakingly unlimited,” Graham said. “Whatever five people believe at any given time in history in terms of the word liberty, they can rewrite our history and come up with a new history. “
Graham’s opposition to abortion is by no means secret — and Judge Kavanaugh’s views aren’t really that hidden either, frankly.
Yet it was a somewhat surprising line of questioning from the Republican, given that other Republicans on the committee have offered Kavanaugh questions appeared designed to paint Dem criticisms of him as extreme.
Instead, Graham seemed to be asking Kavanaugh to do the very thing Judiciary Committee Democrats had: tell them what he really thinks about whether there’s a constitutional right to abortion. Kavanaugh, meanwhile, stuck to his rhetoric of reciting the Supreme Court’s precedent on the issue while declining to weigh in how he specifically would view such a case.
“I hope that one day the court will sit down and think long and hard about the path they’ve charted,” Graham said. “And not just about abortion. Whether or not it’s right for people in your business on any given day based on any given case of controversy, to say that the word liberty looking at the history of the country and the penumbra of rights means ‘X.'”
Well, that’s O.K. It wasn’t entirely clear to Lindsey, either.
Kavanaugh is a “lock” to strip poorer women of their right to abortion in, at a minimum, Red states. (Those with money can travel to get safe abortions). Graham knows it. Kavanaugh knows it. Collins and Murkowski know it. Everyone knows it.
Not only that, but he literally seems to be attacking the very concept of a judicial branch with the power of judicial review because it means the SCOTUS gets to decide what the law means and is, which of course is like a red-carded soccer player complaining “why do we even needs refs anyway?”
So, is Graham arguing that we should just get rid of the Supreme Court?? I don’t personally give a damn what Lindsay Graham or Brett Kavanaugh personally think about abortion; neither one of them is likely to undergo such a procedure any time, and their “opinions” are really moot. It’s really simple; this decision is one for a woman and her physician to discuss and it’s the woman’s right to have one, period. This should be “settled law.” I suffered through some of the hearing last night, and it was just disheartening to watch the candidate fail to answer yes or no questions about his personal opinions and continually quote “precedent” back to the Senators. He has been well-coached.
Graham has a keen interest in most things that will never effect him. As a submissive with a unquenchable thirst for even the slightest modicum of power and control, it comes naturally to him.
The only thing Miss Lindsay has a keen interest in that directly effects him is the banning of plastic straws.