The latest Supreme Court ruling on Louisiana’s abortion law is a prime example of Supreme Court President John Roberts’ knee-bending tendencies when liberal politicians and mainstream media push him, the Tuesday the president of the Judicial Crisis Network, Carrie Severino.
In an interview on “Fox & Friends” with host Brian Kilmeade, Severino said Monday’s 5-4 decision labeling the law, which requires abortionists to have hospital admission privileges, as unconstitutional was especially “frustrating” because Roberts contradicted himself.
SUPREME COURT DEFEATS THE LAW OF LOUISIANA ON RESTRICTIONS OF THE ABORTION CLINIC
“Yes, this is a frustrating decision, especially since the chief justice of the Supreme Court only four years ago ruled that this type of law was, in fact, constitutional. And he claims that it remains in that position,” he said. “But nonetheless, [he] ruled against the law yesterday and, as Judge Thomas noted, this case should not even be in court. “
Chief Justice John Roberts has the opportunity to exercise a new power in the Supreme Court, as the “swinging” judge in the wake of Anthony Kennedy’s retirement.
(Reuters)
June Medical Services LLC v. Russo is remarkably similar to a Texas law that the court ruled was unconstitutional in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt 2016. Roberts had dissented in the 2016 case and said in a concurring opinion that while he still believes that the past case was wrongly decided, he was failing with the majority in the present case due to a court precedent.
“The legal doctrine of stare decisis requires us, in the absence of special circumstances, to treat similar cases equally,” wrote Roberts. “Louisiana law imposes a burden on access to abortion as severe as that imposed by Texas law, for the same reasons. Therefore, Louisiana law cannot be sustained under our precedents.”
Severino noted that, in this case, Roberts and the court “appear to have made an exception for abortion.”
“Well, unfortunately, it has become less and less of a surprise when the chief justice, in these high-profile cases, deviates from what his legal position might have been,” he told Kilmeade, citing a recent ruling on Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. (DACA) program where Roberts seemed to have changed sides.
“When you look at some of the political pressure being exerted on him, it seems that, on the one hand, he promised to call balls and blows [and] At the same time, he seems to be under a lot of pressure when he believes that the court will be criticized by the mainstream media, by the elites. He tends to retire and doesn’t want to make those tough decisions, “said Severino.” That is a real concern and, unfortunately, it is a pattern. “
CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP
According to Severino, who was the secretary of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Roberts did not have to repeal the established law to find in Louisiana’s favor.
“You could have distinguished that case. You could have simply said, ‘the clinics are not the right ones to present this type of argument.’ Instead, the president of the court voted with the liberals to defend a law that he recognizes is not unconstitutional.” he concluded.
