Friday, April 22, 2005
Unintended Constitutional Consequences?
Everyone is picking on Tom DeLay and it's getting a bit ridiculous. It turns out that, despite everything that has been, he may be more right than even he knew.
Two weeks ago, he addressed (by video) a conference of conservatives examining the perceived excesses of the judiciary.
DeLay charged that "unelected, and all too often, unaccountable courts have invented out of whole cloth previously invisible and unasserted constitutional rights to privacy, abortion on demand and same-sex marriage."
The right to privacy is problematic for many conservatives, as it was asserted in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut, a 1965 case involving an attempt to sell contraceptives. Just a few years later, it became precedent for Roe v. Wade. Thus, the direct line from "right to privacy" to "right to abortion."
But, who knew exactly how problematic that the right was? Sometimes, you just can't predict who might be protected by it.
Guess even a man's cave is his castle.
|
Two weeks ago, he addressed (by video) a conference of conservatives examining the perceived excesses of the judiciary.
DeLay charged that "unelected, and all too often, unaccountable courts have invented out of whole cloth previously invisible and unasserted constitutional rights to privacy, abortion on demand and same-sex marriage."
The right to privacy is problematic for many conservatives, as it was asserted in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut, a 1965 case involving an attempt to sell contraceptives. Just a few years later, it became precedent for Roe v. Wade. Thus, the direct line from "right to privacy" to "right to abortion."
But, who knew exactly how problematic that the right was? Sometimes, you just can't predict who might be protected by it.
Guess even a man's cave is his castle.
