Justice Kennedy's Pro-Choice Opinion

By Steven Warshawsky / FOX News
The decision by the Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Carhart, in which the court affirmed the constitutionality of the federal Partial Birth Abortion Act of 2003, is seen wrongly on both the left and the right (neocon statists) as a major victory for abortion foes in this country. In some important ways Justice Kennedy's opinion strengthens the pro-choice side, confounding the immediate impressions of many. The court's opinion in Gonzales was written by Justice Kennedy, who along with Justice O'Connor and Justice Souter authored the controlling plurality opinion in Casey. Make no mistake, Justice Kennedy falls squarely within the pro-choice camp on the abortion question. He believes there is a "constitutional right" to terminate the life of an unborn baby. Full story...

Flashback:
Chuck Baldwin On The Partial Birth Abortion Ruling
By Chuck Baldwin / The Covenant News
This ruling authorizes the abortionist to take the baby out of the mother's womb up to the point where the baby's navel is visible and still perform his dastardly work of killing the baby. And there is more. The bill even authorizes the abortionist to kill the partially-delivered baby if the baby has been delivered past its navel, if the baby passed the "critical point by accident or inadvertence."

Why Court's Confusing Partial Birth Abortion
Decision Can Kill Babies By the Millions
Christian Gallery Editorial
A brief added to the partial birth abortion decision by Justices Thomas and Scalia helps us see the true meaning of the Court's decision. If you will study the brief added by those two Justices, it will become obvious that instead of the recent decision showing a 5-4 Supreme Court split in favor of overturning legalized abortion, the recent ruling actually reveals that the Supreme Court as presently constituted is split 7-2, with the majority composed of Supreme Court Justices who have no intention whatsoever of overturning Roe v. Wade. Why is Justices Scalia and Thomas's brief so revealing, so significant? Listen to what Justice Thomas wrote, with Scalia agreeing, "I write separately to reiterate my view that the Court's abortion jurisprudence, including Casey and Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) has no basis in the Constitution."

Posted by Editor at April 30, 2007 06:20 PM