Brownback sets sights on Roe

Appearing on Meet the Press last weekend, John McCain, who opposes abortion rights, said he doesn’t believe Roe v. Wade will be overturned, “at least not any time soon given the tenor of politics in America and the courts in America.”

Apparently, some of McCain’s Republican colleagues take a slightly different approach to the issue. In fact, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) is holding Senate hearings targeting Roe.

The women behind the Supreme Court cases that led to legalized abortion told a Senate panel Thursday they never intended to help the abortion rights movement and claimed they were duped by lawyers representing them more than three decades ago.

The anti-abortion views of Norma McCorvey and Sandra Cano, the anonymous plaintiffs in Roe v. Wade and its companion case, Doe v. Bolton, are well-known, but it is the first time both have testified together in Congress.

Both women have tried unsuccessfully to overturn the cases that have spawned years of bitter debate over the question of abortion. They were called, along with legal and medical experts, to testify on the consequences of the 1973 decisions that found a Constitutional right to abortion.

And because the hearing was convened by Brownback, those consequences were characterized as catastrophic. What’s more, Brownback is just getting started, calling yesterday’s event “the first in a series to highlight the effect certain Supreme Court decisions have had on American life.”

None of the events will feature a “Paid for by Sam Brownback for President” sign, but they probably should.

Well if they don’t have any domestic policy initiatives to work on (i.e. legislation), they might as well have some culture-war hearings…

  • Brownback held a hearing on gay marriage last month, the House took on flag burning this week and here’s abortion.

    I think Edo’s onto something.

  • Don’t forget what else Brownback has been busy with.

    Brownback, chairman of a Senate Judiciary subcommittee, already has held hearings this year on the need for a constitutional amendment to protect marriage and the need for more federal obscenity prosecutions.

    How long before dissent becomes obscenity?

  • How long before dissent becomes obscenity?

    It already is if you are Dem. IOKIFYR, though.

  • Comments are closed.