General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Please answer this question "yes" or "no." [View all]RZM
(8,556 posts)From what I do know, legal opinions vary about that. Isn't this why the holy grail of the anti-abortion movement is a constitutional amendment banning abortion? That would put abortion in the constitution and settle the argument once and for all.
So I honestly don't know. It's possible a nominee could believe it's technically not a constitutional right, but still be 100 percent supportive of choice anyway and vote on the right side every time such a case came before the court.
Maybe I'm wrong about how the SCOTUS works. I'm certainly not an expert on the subject. But isn't possible that a justice could make an argument that abortion isn't guaranteed in the constitution but still has to be legal anyway? Are 'legal rights' exactly the same as 'constitutional rights?'
I don't know. What I do know is that I'd want a justice supportive of choice. I'll leave the interpretation of how they arrive at that position to the them and the legal scholars.