July (Web-only) 2005

ARTICLE TOOLS

Find similar articles E-mail this page

Questions on John Roberts's abortion stance, but none regarding his wife
The country remains atwitter about where John Roberts stands on abortion. Democratic Senators are promising to grill him until he says how he'd vote on overturning Roe v. Wade. Religious activists are still assiduously avoiding the a-word, but are telling their supporters not to worry.

Some seem confused. The Los Angeles Times writes today, "Judge Roberts' public positions on abortion and Roe v. Wade appear to be inconsistent."

But as Christianity Today's Collin Hansen wrote yesterday, Roberts's comments on Roe v. Wade may be unclear, but it's not inconsistent to say that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided, should be overruled, and is the settled law of the land. Here's the clue: His previous nomination hearings were for an appellate court position. Shortly after Roberts's now-famous declaration, "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land," he explained, "As the Constitution uses the term 'inferior court judge,' I'll be bound to follow the Supreme Court precedent regardless of what type of constructionist I, personally, might be." That is no longer quite so relevant when you're talking about a Supreme Court position. Then again, as Focus on the Family's James Dobson said, "To my knowledge Judge Roberts has never talked about abortion and he certainly has no rulings about it, so we don't know what his private views are."

But we sure know about his wife's views. The front page of today's Los Angeles Times declares, "Wife of Nominee Holds Strong Antiabortion Views." The piece mainly focuses on Jane Sullivan Roberts's longtime involvement with Feminists for Life of America, including serving as executive vice president from 1995 to 1999 and currently providing ...