Senator Specter is making the rounds backtracking on remarks
he made immediately after his re-election victory. In a post
election interview, in which he declared that there are no legal
giants on the Supreme Court, Mr. Specter said, "When you
talk about judges who would change the right of a woman to
choose, overturn Roe vs. Wade, I think that is unlikely. The
president is well aware of what happened, when a number of his
nominees were sent up, with the filibuster. ... And I would
expect the president to be mindful of the considerations which I
am mentioning."
Some groups thought that this was a subtle warning to President
Bush that he'd better not attempt to nominate another Miguel
Estrada, and they immediately went on the attack against Mr.
Specter. I received several notices from pro-life groups urging
those on the e-mail list to contact the other senators on the
Judiciary Committee and voice their concern if Mr. Specter is
named chairman. Apparently, the flood of calls to Congress has
created quite a brouhaha and has the senator making appearances
on television news programs to smooth things over. Mr. Specter
was expected to attend the Monday meeting at the Grand Hyatt
Hotel, where he would be making an attempt to explain to the
high-powered conservative New Yorkers who attend the monthly
sessions what he really meant to say.
Chris Slattery, director of Expectant Mothercare, a
crisis-pregnancy center, organized a pro-life rally Monday
outside the Grand Hyatt, and a simultaneous demonstration was set
to take place in Washington outside the office of the majority
leader, Senator Frist. At the last minute, Mr. Specter canceled
the Grand Hyatt appearance. I contacted Mr. Slattery to see if
the picket was going forward. He said it would, because Senator
Santorum, the junior senator from Pennsylvania, was also
scheduled to appear, and it was important to keep the pressure
on.
"Many of those protesting today are Catholics and
Evangelicals who worked very hard for the re-election of George
Bush," Mr. Slattery wrote to me. "I'm appalled at the
utter contempt displayed by Senator Arlen Specter toward our
pro-life, pro-family values. Voters expect judicial conservatives
to
be reviewed with respect and fairness by the Senate Judiciary
Committee - but Specter's statements clearly demonstrate that he
is incapable of this. We oppose giving the Judiciary Chair to
Senator Specter and urge Senator Santorum to urge a no vote
against him in the Senate."
Mr. Slattery should also have included conservative Jews in his
statement, as Rabbi Yehuda Levin of the Union of Orthodox Rabbis
was scheduled to be one of the speakers.
The organized attack on Mr. Specter's possible elevation to
chairman of this important committee has been so successful that
it's rather amusing to hear him deny, deny, deny. "I did not
warn the president about anything and was very respectful of his
constitutional authority on the appointment of federal
judges," Mr. Specter said.
"I have never and would never apply any litmus test on the
abortion issue," he said in a statement issued last
Thursday.
I guess he's forgotten the 1996 campaign speech in which he
promised to protect abortion rights and would do what he could to
get government out of the bedroom.
Many network commentators have been pooh-poohing the Bush
re-election as not really being about moral values. They will now
probably try to twist this protest as an example of the fanatical
religious extremists seizing the opportunity to overthrow Roe v.
Wade. But the issue of the judicial activism by liberal judges
circumventing the majority opinion should be of concern to all
Americans, not just the religious. With three, possibly four,
Supreme Court nominations likely to come up in the next four
years, it is vitally important to have judges who rely strictly
on the Constitution to base their decisions.
Yes, there is a distinct possibility that Roe v. Wade would be
overturned simply because it does not meet constitutional
guidelines. Oh, my goodness! Does that mean that you won't be
able to get rid of an unwanted pregnancy? No. It just means that
the abortion laws will be decided by the states. That suggests
that in the blue states abortion will probably still be legal. So
simmer down.
If nothing else, the controversy over Arlen Specter becoming
chairman of the Judiciary Committee should bring to light his
other statements that make him a very poor choice for such an
important post.
Mr. Specter supports the World Court's jurisdiction over
Americans in uniform. Do you want our sons and daughters tried as
war criminals because they risked their lives in the war on
terrorism? He's flip-flopped on abortion, and he's pro-U.N. I
think we can do better than the senator from Pennsylvania.