ConfirmThem

By AndrewHyman Comments () / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

On Monday, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter will say the following, according to the NY Times:

While I will not ask Judge Roberts whether he would overrule Roe, there are, in my opinion, entirely appropriate questions on his jurisprudential views that might be asked....I consider it appropriate to question him as to his views on stare decisis, or following precedents, as well as his views with respect to the importance of stability in the law, which Judge Roberts has identified, along with 'modesty,' as one of his lodestones.

Specter, of course, is hoping to get Judge Roberts to pledge allegiance to the new-fangled doctrine of "super-stare decisis." Professor Earl Maltz wrote about that doctrine shortly after Planned Parenthood v. Casey was --- as Senator Schumer would say --- "passed by the Supreme Court" in 1992. Here's what Maltz said:

In essence, the opinion asserts that if one side can take control of the Court on an issue of major national importance, it can not only use the Constitution to bind other branches of government to its position, but also have that position protected from later judicial action by a kind of super-stare decisis.

For further background about stare decisis, see here. If I were a Senator, my question on this subject would be simple: "Judge Roberts, if millions of human lives may hang in the balance, do you think it's more important that an issue be settled than that it be settled right?"

UPDATE: Sen. Specter's full statement is here.