General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCollins voices skepticism that new Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade
GOP Sen. Susan Collins (Maine) is voicing skepticism that the Supreme Court will overturn the Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion regardless of who ever is confirmed to replace retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy.
In an interview with "The Daily" podcast that was posted on Monday, Collins said she believes Chief Justice John Roberts could be a vote against overturning the ruling.
She also said that she thinks Trump was wrong when he said during the presidential campaign that the landmark decision would be overturned if he's allowed to nominate individuals to the court.
"I think, for example, [Chief Justice] John Roberts given his respect for precedent and his cautious approach, despite what personal views he may hold, I would be very surprised if the chief justice would ever vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, just to give you an example," Collins said.
Kennedy was the fifth vote in a 1992 decision upholding Roe v. Wade, which established the right to an abortion. His retirement, effective at the end of the month, has sparked fears that his replacement could lead the court to overrule the decision.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/395179-collins-skeptical-supreme-court-would-overturn-roe-v-wade
And the CYA begins.
Polly Hennessey
(6,812 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)More credible that way.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I would rather not have to find out.
FBaggins
(26,775 posts)I think she's right that Roberts is unlikely to allow a straight-up removal of Roe (though I also agree with you that I'm not anxious to find out if I'm right).
However - we almost certainly would see a number of anti-abortion state measures that incrementally chip away at Roe... and Roberts would almost certainly allow those to get past.
Roberts is thought to prefer broader support for narrower rulings rather than 5-4 on a blockbuster. Replacing Kennedy might allow him to leverage the threat of a Roe v. Wade overturn - into a 6-3 or 7-2 ruling on something narrower.
Stargleamer
(1,992 posts)She's purposely acting dumb and gullible, is the only way I can make sense of what she's saying. Abood was precedent too
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)catbyte
(34,487 posts)helped save the ACA, but that's about it. I remember Democrats kowtowing to her while the ACA was being debated. She made all these demands that weakened the bill which the Democrats agreed to just to get her vote then she ended up screwing them anyway by voting no. Fuck her.
Freethinker65
(10,073 posts)When she knows the opposite is true.
She knew she would never get the vote to shore up healthcare subsidies from McConnell, but she went ahead and pretended at the time that she traded her vote for the promise.
Let's hear from from reliable individuals.
RandySF
(59,443 posts)beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)GeorgeGist
(25,324 posts)KT2000
(20,593 posts)They tricked me!!!
CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)Depending on a Republican to do the right thing is ludicrous, especially one that has toed the line for Trump in major ways.