In a surprising move, newly minted Justice Brett Kavanaugh
and Chief Justice John Roberts joined with the Court’s liberal justices to
prevent the high court from deciding whether states could defund Planned
Parenthood. The move will let stand lower
court rulings that struck down two state laws in Louisiana and Kansas that
would have barred the abortion provider from receiving Medicare funds.
Louisiana and Kansas had sought certiorari to allow the Supreme Court to hear their appeals in Gee v. Planned Parenthood of Gulf Coast and
Andersen v. Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri. Four judges must
agree to accept a case and the votes of Kavanaugh and Roberts to deny
certiorari killed any chance that the Court would hear the Planned Parenthood
cases, let alone allow states to defund the group.
Several other states have attempted to ban funding for
Planned Parenthood at the state level after Republicans in Washington were
unable to move a funding ban through Congress. For now, it appears that any
further attempts to cut off the group’s federal money will be defeated.
Chief Justice John Roberts typically votes in the
conservative bloc but has been key to some high-profile disappointments for
constitutionalists. Roberts was the key vote in saving Obamacare with his
opinion that the individual mandate was really a tax and therefore constitutional.
Kavanaugh’s vote may surprise some, but several observers
predicted that if President Trump wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade, Kavanaugh was the wrong judge to pick. Similar to Roberts,
Kavanaugh
ruled on an Obamacare case in which he did not dispute the constitutionality
of the health insurance law. Prior to Kavanaugh’s confirmation, Sen. Susan
Collins (R-Maine) argued that Kavanaugh was a judge who would uphold precedent.
That statement was interpreted as an indication that Kavanaugh would not strike
down Roe and possibly Obamacare as
well.
Justice Clarence Thomas, who was appointed to the Court by the recently departed George H.W. Bush,
dissented, writing that the other judges were afraid to tackle the hot-button issue. “Some tenuous connection to a
politically fraught issue does not justify abdicating our judicial duty,” Thomas
said. “If anything, neutrally applying the law is all the more important
when political issues are in the background.”
The decision not to grant certiorari
is a hard hit for pro-life groups. “If Kavanaugh was going to deal a major blow
to health care rights during his first session on the court, this would have
been the case to do it,” Tim Jost, an emeritus professor at Washington and Lee
University School of Law, said in Politico.
During the 2016 election, Donald Trump’s pro-life platform
and promise to appoint judges who would overturn Roe was a major reason that many Republicans held their noses and
voted for him over Hillary. Given Mr. Trump’s long pro-choice history and the ready
availability of more firmly pro-life, constitutionalist judges such as Amy
Coney Barrett, many of those voters must wonder today if Justice Kavanaugh has
gone rogue or if he is doing exactly what President Trump and other pro-choice
Republicans wanted him to.
Originally published
on The
Resurgent
No comments:
Post a Comment