If Ax Falls on Roe, It May Also Split GOP

Yahoo! News reported Social conservatives relish the idea that Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's resignation from the Supreme Court has moved them one step closer to their goal of outlawing abortion.

Much as I might like to see abortions either outlawed, or at least reasonable restrictions applied. I know that one, or even two, new Supreme Court justices are not going to produce that result. Even if Roe was overturned (which unfortunately is not likely), it would just turn the matter over to the states, and at least the blue states would probably still permit it.

Liberals are vowing to fight any potential successor who would, unlike O'Connor, favor overturning Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 ruling that affirmed a woman's right to end a pregnancy. But the political irony that few on either side readily acknowledge — but many are pondering — is that Roe's demise could transform American elections by crippling the conservative political majority that opposes abortion and by giving new life to hobbled liberals who support the ruling's preservation.

The only new life it would result in, would be lives of the babies that were not aborted.

That the 32-year-old landmark decision could be overturned seems a distant possibility. Justices who believe the ruling should stand hold five seats on the nine-member court, even with O'Connor gone. But the prospect of progress toward overturning Roe — and the realization that President Bush could have at least two chances to make transformative appointments to the court

One of whom would replace a Chief Justice that is not in favor of abortioin

— has exposed a disagreement between conservatives who want abortion criminalized and pragmatic Republicans concerned that shifting the issue from the courts to the ballot box would lead to massive GOP losses. Of particular concern is the party's fate in closely contested battlegrounds such as Ohio, Florida and Michigan, where the resurgence of the abortion issue could alienate moderate voters who have helped Republicans make gains on all levels. "Smart strategists inside the party don't want the status quo changed," said Tony Fabrizio, chief pollster for the 1996 Republican presidential campaign of Bob Dole. "This may cause Republicans like Arnold Schwarzenegger — who are strongly committed to being pro-choice — to flip or to push for a third-party movement," he added. "If they did outlaw it, it would ultimately turn the Republican Party into a theocratic-based party

That is the stupidist thing I have ever read.

rather than an ideological party, and the party would necessarily start shedding people."

Jayson @PoliPundit blogged I laughed out loud while reading this example of liberal cognitive dissonance from Peter Wallsten of the left-of-Pravda Los Angeles Times. No, a complete Fisking really is not in the cards. For that would take up too much bandwidth. But, having said that, I can’t help but marvel at the “affirmed a women’s right to end a pregnancy” spin. Sorry, Chomsky, but Roe did nothing of the sort. To the contrary, Roe imposed, by federal judicial fiat, a mandate under which the individual states were precluded from deigning, through their own legislative processes, to criminalize abortions. But nice try, Sparky. More to the point is the extent to which the article projects gloom and doom for the GOP if Roe is overturned (which it eventually will be), and the issue whether or not to outlaw or to restrict abortions is returned completely to the domains of the individual states. What I find amusing is how . . . well, you know, everything seems to portend gloom and doom for the GOP in the media’s alternative reality.

Patterico blogged I said this yesterday, but it bears repeating: Justice O’Connor’s retirement isn’t about abortion. But it is about reasonable restrictions on abortion. The retirement of Justice O’Connor does not, by itself, endanger Roe v. Wade. But it does raise the possibility that states may be entitled to pass sensible limitations on abortion, like strict parental notification, longer waiting periods with real informed consent, or — most importantly — a ban on partial-birth abortion. Because such reasonable restrictions are quite popular, look for newspapers to mention them only in passing. The strategy of leftist abortion activists is to push the panic button on Roe v. Wade itself, and their surrogates at the nation’s largest newspapers understand and will support this approach. Rather than portraying the issue as a chance to allow real restrictions on abortion, the newspapers will portray the issue as a simple case of the basic right to abortion hanging in the balance.