Alito and Roe: the Road Ahead

Posted on January 13, 2006

As the Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings come to a close, it appears that the Democrats do not have enough votes to filibuster Alito. It is also clear to anyone who listened to his answers or who read the transcripts that Alito stands behind his prior statements that a) he believes that the Constitution does not guarantee the right to abortion to women and that b)he believes that the unitary theory of executive privelege is a mighty fine thing (the layman's translation of unitary theory is that president can do anything he wants if he claims we're at war, whether it's wiretapping, torturing etc. and Congress can't stop him.) So Alito looks like a go, barring some last-minute surprise.

Eleanor Clift discusses the fallout to Republican politicians if Samuel Alito makes it to the Supreme Court and then is the deciding vote in overturning Roe vs. Wade. Clift says Alito refused to say whether he agrees that the 1973 Roe ruling is considered settled law.

If Roe is overturned, the battle goes back to the states. Many states already have laws on the books outlawing abortion, which would simply go back into effect. Only California and New York are certain to preserve the right to choice. But with Roe out of the way, Congress could immediately pass a federal law outlawing abortion, which would apply to both California and New York.

Elanor Clift and a few other commentators believe that will finally wake up the country and cause it to take action and vote straight Democratic ticket. Even if that's true, that is cold comfort for the millions of women who would be caught in the "between years" of this destruction of women's rights and the inevitable backlash.