How Rudy could sway me
By Whitfox Posted in Archived — Comments (2) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Since it's being asked how Rudy could sway social cons, I'll answer the question for myself: If I believed Rudy would deliver that 5th vote against Roe, I'd vote for him. The Court's not everything, but it's important.
The problem is there's very little reason to believe him. What he's done is make side-stepping promises about his selection committee and his odd definition of strict constructionism. He hasn't committed himself in any way - except in favor of infanticide, when he promised not to be effectively pro-life.
If he wants to be believed, that has to end. A candidate making a pledge against his personal beliefs has to do more to commit himself, not less.
Let's see this storied fighter fight against abortion. That can start with pronouncing his opposition to Roe, and promising that he will not nominate a judge that so betrays the Constitution. He can continue by making this issue a regular part of his stump speeches.
If Rudy's not going to oppose abortion in the primary, where it would clearly gain him support, he's surely not going to risk it in the general or in office. Who his VP would be is quite irrelevant.
If he actually carries this out, I'm willing to vote for him. Not because I particularly trust him, but for two reasons:
1. He won't have come to power by being pro-abortion. That greatly limits how far left he can carry the party, should he betray pro-lifers.
2. Since he firmly committed himself, any post-election waffling will rightfully be interpreted as backing down from a fight. I'm willing to take a chance on Rudy's pride here.
Of course, I don't believe for a minute this scenario is going to happen. Rudy has had plenty of opportunities to give up his socially liberal views. That he won't should tell people something about his core beliefs and likely governance.
First of all, what makes you think there are now four votes to overrule Casey/Roe? There may only be two. A lot of people, including other judges and legal experts, do not think Roberts or Alito would.
Second, it's possible that there will be no Supreme Court vacancies in the next 5 years. I don't care if John Paul Stevens is in his 90's.
Third, what difference will it make if no one who even might oppose Casey or Roe could get confirmed by the Senate? You don't think they'll require a promise before voting on cloture?
Fourth, I don't see any state prepared to lead the way to bring any sort of "certworthy" case before the court. They could be working on some creative attempts now. Even getting Akron overruled would be a start.
Of course, these are only possibilities to ponder. I'm not saying any of them will or will not happen. I just think they should be considered, especially the first one.
if you still aren't convinced, nothing will convince you. How many times does he have to say he will appoint strict constructionist judges? He has said somewhere in three digits now and you say you still aren't convinced. He has made everyone on his judicial staff a strict constructionist. Again, if between these two things you still say you aren't convinced, you won't be convinced even after he makes someone like Miguel Estrada the next nominee for the court.
Proprietor Nation