Candidate Reactions To Supreme Court’s Ruling On Partial Birth Abortion
April 18, 2007 | Permalink
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court declared that 2003 Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act was constitutional.
Needless to say, this is a divisive and has spilled over into the presidential campaign. If anything, this issue has the potential to hurt democrats more than republicans. Not necessarily because of their position on the issue, but rather because of the divisions within their own party over this issue. Sen. Harry Reid, the current Senate Majority Leader, voted in favor of the 2003 Ban On Partial Birth Abortion as well as current presidential candidate, Sen. Joe Biden. I imagine we’ll see Sen. Reid laying low in this issue as not to clash with the primary candidates; I’m not sure how Biden will handle it yet…
Candidate Reactions To The Ruling
“The Supreme Court reached the correct conclusion in upholding the congressional ban on partial birth abortion. I agree with it.”
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a victory for those who cherish the sanctity of life and integrity of the judiciary. The ruling ensures that an unacceptable and unjustifiable practice will not be carried out on our innocent children. It also clearly speaks to the importance of nominating and confirming strict constructionist judges who interpret the law as it is written, and do not usurp the authority of Congress and state legislatures. As we move forward, it is critically important that our party continues to stand on the side of life.”
“Today, our nation’s highest court reaffirmed the value of life in America by upholding a ban on a practice that offends basic human decency. This decision represents a step forward in protecting the weakest and most innocent among us.”
“I am very pleased that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled to uphold the ban on partial birth abortions,” said Brownback. “This ban was enacted to put an end to one of the most grotesque forms of abortion, and it is completely in line with the respect for life that is at the very heart of our Constitution. This is a great step forward for our nation’s citizens, born and unborn.”
“I commend the United States Supreme Court for upholding the nation’s ban on partial-birth abortions. This decision sends a clear message that the United States values life and has no tolerance for this gruesome, abhorrent way to take a life. There is no place for partial-birth abortions in this country, and I am pleased the court upheld the law passed by Congress.”
“Today the Supreme Court put an end to this barbaric practice of infanticide. One can only hope this is the first step towards ending the tragedy of abortions.”
“The Supreme Court’s ruling to prohibit the abhorrent practice of partial birth abortion represents a victory in the effort to protect and promote human life. This decision further underscores the American people’s overwhelming opposition to this practice and rightfully defends the inherent value and sanctity of each and every life. Today’s ruling signals to lawmakers, advocates and the general public, that there is clear support for the rights of the unborn. It is my hope that this support, along with today’s judicial action, will continue translating into constructive policies that directly benefit the unborn and ensure this vulnerable population is afforded the protection it deserves.”
“I am pleased that the Supreme Court ruled to uphold the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act passed by Congress in 2003 to protect mothers and children from the use of this gruesome procedure. As governor of Arkansas, I led the fight to enact a similar ban to protect the sanctity of unborn human life – and I support a federal ban. With this landmark ruling, I am optimistic that we are turning the tide in favor of life.” He added: The Republican Congress was right to enact to a federal law in 2003 banning partial birth abortion procedures. Today’s Supreme Court – which upheld the 2003 law – is a narrow victory for those who support the culture of life, beginning with conception. I applaud the Court’s action, which also sends a strong reminder that we must stay vigilant in our cause to protect those who cannot protect themselves.”
“This decision marks a dramatic departure from four decades of Supreme Court rulings that upheld a woman’s right to choose and recognized the importance of women’s health. Today’s decision blatantly defies the Court’s recent decision in 2000 striking down a state partial-birth abortion law because of its failure to provide an exception for the health of the mother. As the Supreme Court recognized in Roe v. Wade in 1973, this issue is complex and highly personal; the rights and lives of women must be taken into account. It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito.”
“I could not disagree more strongly with today’s Supreme Court decision. The ban upheld by the Court is an ill-considered and sweeping prohibition that does not even take account for serious threats to the health of individual women. This hard right turn is a stark reminder of why Democrats cannot afford to lose the 2008 election. Too much is at stake - starting with, as the Court made all too clear today, a woman’s right to choose.”
I strongly disagree with today’s Supreme Court ruling, which dramatically departs from previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women. As Justice Ginsburg emphasized in her dissenting opinion, this ruling signals an alarming willingness on the part of the conservative majority to disregard its prior rulings respecting a woman’s medical concerns and the very personal decisions between a doctor and patient. I am extremely concerned that this ruling will embolden state legislatures to enact further measures to restrict a woman’s right to choose, and that the conservative Supreme Court justices will look for other opportunities to erode Roe v. Wade, which is established federal law and a matter of equal rights for women.
“Throughout my career I have believed that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. I am deeply troubled by today’s Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of the Partial Birth Abortion Act of 2003, a decision which will needlessly endanger women’s health throughout the country. I voted against this legislation in 2003 because it did not include an exception to allow this type of medical procedure when a mother’s health is at risk. In overturning long-standing Supreme Court precedent, today’s decision will create uncertainty throughout the country for women and doctors on what medical procedures are legal, and will undermine their ability to decide what is most appropriate for a patient’s health, free from politics. While I am disappointed by today’s decision by the Supreme Court, it has renewed my pledge to continue to support a woman’s right to reproductive choice.”
“Today the Supreme Court took a dangerous step backward in regard to Americans’ rights to personal choice and privacy. … In doing so, the Court disregarded the opinion of experienced and respected medical professionals who oppose the ban because there are no exceptions protecting women’s health. While not unexpected, I believe this unfortunate decision is a clear signal that the Supreme Court is opening the door to further challenges to personal medical decisions between patients and doctors that should not involve the government.” He added, “I am concerned, as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated so clearly in her dissenting opinion, that this vote could be the beginning of ‘an effort to chip away a right declared again and again by this court.’ … I sincerely hope that is not the case.”
We’ll update this post as more statements become available (although, shame on any campaign that hasn’t released a statement about this yet).
Sphere: Related Content
This is a great day for the pro-life movement. We have Senator Sam Brownback to thank for rejecting the Miers nomination and getting Justice Alito on the court.
Uh oh, we’re in trouble - somethings come along that will bust our bubble.
With abortion rights now swinging with one vote in the Supreme Court, I can expect a very fun, very energized election. Its the RIGHTS last stand and the LEFTS last chance.
To whom it may concern:
I have started an education policy blog for the 2008 election at http://edpolicy08.blogspot.com/ where I will follow each candidates positions on eduction. I am currently profiling each candidate in alphabetical order, alternating by political party and then I will move on to further analysis.
I’m looking forward to hearing what other people say so please feel free to stop by and leave your thoughts.
-Ed Policy. (it’s an anonymous blog from a current classroom teacher…)
[...] someone who is strongly pro-life, I was pleased to see this ruling. If you would like to know how the various presidential candidates have responded to this historic decision, 2008 Central has been compiling the candidates’ official [...]
[...] 20th, 2007 by Todd Go here to find the 2008 Presidential candidates’ reactions to the recent ruling by the Supreme Court [...]
This issue, this ruling is more a hand grenade for the left than the right. Any Dimocrat who praises this ruling risks offending EMILY’s List, NARAL and the ghost of Molly “Hog Jowls” Ivins, any Dim who disses the ruling offends the electorate.
The Dems should at least be honest when supporting this infanticide if they refuse to allow us to talk about what the procedure actually does. The “health” exception is not “medical health” such as the life of the mother as they would lead us to believe, as the bill precludes the ban where the mother’s life is in danger, rather, when they say “health” they want the “health” exception in Doe v. Bolton which extends so broad as to include negative emotions, thereby swallowing the rule. Duplicitous cowardice, all of them.
[...] Richardson’s response to the Supreme Court’s ruling that upheld the ban on partial birth abortion can be found here. [...]
[...] to make clear his support for abortion rights. (But presumably not partial birth abortion, as he was happy the Supreme Court upheld the Congressional [...]
I have a question to ask anyone who thinks that a woman should have a right to kill her baby at all, especially by a partial birth abortion. What difference does it make to the woman’s health if the baby is born alive or dead? The baby has to come out and it seems to me, at this stage, many babies would be able to live and many may not even need medical intervention. With so many premies living, let the baby live, get help with your medical issues, and give the baby to loving parents.