In response to:

The Supreme Importance of the Court's Message

Linda1761 Wrote: Jun 30, 2012 2:38 PM
And what, exactly, would you have had him do? Until a future SCOTUS can find a way to overturn, Roe v. Wade is the law of the land. Bad law? You bet it is, but it is the law. No president can simply wave a wand and make it go away. All the president can do is fill Court vacancies with the most conservative, thoughtful and competent jurists he or she can find. Bush thought he had done that. Time will tell on Roberts.
Linda1761 Wrote: Jul 01, 2012 1:32 PM
Not entirely accurate, Louie. On the right to abortion, Roe v. Wade is the law of the land. And SCOTUS, whether we like it or not, has been making law through misinterpretation of the Constitution for a very long time. That is why "elections have consequences" is such a critical notion.
Louie13 Wrote: Jun 30, 2012 6:26 PM
Linda, the court does not have the right under the constitution to legislate from the bench and make laws, in this case to create the right to murder your own baby. The Constitution is the law of the land, not Roe v Wade. Judges can't legally make laws or amend the Constitution.

"I feel like Justice Roberts cheated on me," said a friend, half in jest, half expressing honest disappointment. Having once emceed a "Women for Roberts" press conference for C-SPAN back in the day, I heard a lot of similar sentiments in the wake of his penning the majority opinion for the Supreme Court decision that "upheld Obamacare," as many have put it.

But the whole of the president's health care legislation wasn't actually the question before the Court.

I was not alone Thursday morning, thinking about the man who appointed the chief justice, former President George W. Bush. Reading the...