Abortion law author denounces Supreme Court decision

Washington D.C., Sep 5, 2018 / 05:27 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- US Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh faced a range of questions on Wednesday, the second day of his confirmation hearings, including on abortion and religious freedom.

Kavanaugh affirmed Sept. 5 that Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey are “an important precedent of the Supreme Court,” and said that “being able to participate in the public square” with “religious speech” is “a part of the American tradition.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) asked Kavanaugh in the morning about women’s reproductive rights.

“As a general proposition, I understand the importance of the precedent set forth in Roe v. Wade,” Kavanaugh replied. “Roe v. Wade held, of course, and it was reaffirmed in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, that a woman has a constitutional right to obtain an abortion before viability, subject to reasonable regulation by the state, up to the point where that regulation constitutes an undue burden on the woman’s right to obtain an abortion.”

He said that the Roe decision “is settled as a precedent of the Supreme Court … one of the important things to keep in mind about Roe v. Wade is that it has been reaffirmed many times over the past 45 years, as you know, and most prominently, most importantly, reaffirmed in Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992.”

Feinstein indicated that “how you make a judgement on these issues is really important to our vote as to whether to support you or not,” saying, “I truly believe that women should be able to control their own reproductive systems, within, obviously, some concern for a viable fetus.”

Kavanaugh replied: “I understand your point of view on that, Senator. And I understand how passionate and how deeply people feel about this issue. I understand the importance of the issue. I understand the importance that people attach to the Roe v. Wade decision, to the Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision.”

“This is the point I want to make that I think is important. Planned Parenthood v. Casey reaffirmed Roe and did so by considering the stare decisis factors. So Casey now becomes a precedent on precedent. It’s not as if it’s just a run-of-the-mill case that was decided and never been reconsidered. It applied the stare decisis factors and decided to reaffirm it.”

“That makes Casey a precedent on precedent,” he said, which he compared to Miranda rights.

Feinstein asked, “What do you say your position today is on a woman’s right to choose?”

Kavanaugh answered: “As a judge, it is an important precedent of the Supreme Court. By it, I mean Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. [It’s] been reaffirmed many times. Casey is precedent on precedent, which itself is an important factor to remember. And I understand the significance of the issue, the jurisprudential issue, and I understand the significance as best I can; I always try, and I do hear, of the real-world effects of that decision, as I tried to do all of the decisions of my court, and of the Supreme Court.”

In the afternoon, Kavanaugh  was questioned by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) about religious liberty issues.

Cruz first asked in that regard about the Ninth Amendment, which says, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

In his discussion of this amendment and its protection of unenumerated rights, Kavanaugh said that “an example of that is the old Pierce case where Oregon passed a law that said everyone in the state – this is in the 1920s – everyone in the state of Oregon had to attend, every student had to attend, a public school. A challenge was brought by parents who wanted to send their children to a parochial school, a religious school. The Supreme Court upheld the rights of the parents to send their children to a religious parochial school and struck down that Oregon law. That’s one of the foundations of the unenumerated rights.”

Since Kavanaugh had mentioned religious liberty, Cruz then asked about his views on the importance of religious liberty and how the Constitution protects it.

“To begin with,” Kavanaugh answered, “it’s important in the original Constitution; even before the Bill of Rights, the framers made clear in article six, ‘no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States’. So that was very important, in the original Constitution, that the framers thought it very important that there not be a test to become a legislator, to become an executive brand official, to become a judge … the framers understood the importance of protecting conscience, it’s akin to the free speech protection in many ways … If you have religious beliefs, religious people, religious speech, you have just as much right to be in the public square, and to participate in the public programs, as others do.”

“In other countries around the world,” he said, “you’re not free to take your religion into the public square.” He cited crosses being knocked off of churches in mainland China, and that “you can only practice in your own home, you can’t practice, you can’t bring your religious belief into the public square. And being able to participate in the public square is a part of the American tradition. I think as a religious person, religious speech, religious ideas, religious thoughts, that’s important.”

Kavanaugh noted that the Supreme Court precedent has recognized that “some religious traditions in governmental practices are rooted sufficiently in history and tradition to be upheld … so the religious tradition reflected in the First Amendment is a foundational part of American liberty. And it’s important for us as judges to recognize that and not – and recognize too that, as with speech, unpopular religions are protected.”

Cruz asked, of the free exercise and establishment clauses, “are they at cross purposes and intention are or they complimentary of each other?”

Kavanaugh answered that “I think in general it’s good to think of them as both supporting the concept of freedom of religion … to begin with you’re equally American no matter what religion you are, if you’re no religion at all. That it’s also important, the Supreme Court has said, that religious people be allowed to speak and participate in the public square without having to sacrifice their religion in speaking in the public square, for example, or practicing their religion in the public square. At the same time, I think both clauses protect the idea, or protect against, coercing people into practicing a religion when they might be of a different religion or might be of no religion at all. So the coercion idea, I think, comes out of both clauses as well … I think it’s good to think of the two clauses working together for the concept of freedom of religion in the United States, which I think is foundational of the Constitution.”

[…]

“This is a spiritual journey for me. I reached my decision through deep prayer, through hard logic" said former presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. upon making the announcement. / Credit: Photo by Rebecca Noble/Getty Images

Washin… […]

Denver Newsroom, Apr 23, 2020 / 12:24 am (CNA).- While a New Jersey state senator has launched a petition seeking the “thoughtful” resumption of religious services with “reasonable precautions,” the Archdiocese of Newark has stressed the wisdom of statewide restrictions on gatherings given the prevalence of the novel coronavirus in the region.

“As the New Jersey region unfortunately has the highest number of reported Covid-19 cases in the nation, with increasing reported deaths, it is prudent to continue compliance with statewide mandates for social distancing protocols at this time,” Maria Margiotta, director of communications and public relations for the archdiocese, told CNA April 22.

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy’s executive orders ban gatherings of any size as the state battles the novel coronavirus. Businesses deemed non-essential have shut down in an effort to slow the spread of the virus. While symptoms of infection are nonexistent, mild or moderate for most people, a significant minority require hospitalization. Infection can be fatal in a small percentage of cases, especially where the person is elderly or otherwise has health vulnerabilities.

In New Jersey, the executive order’s limits drew objection from State Sen. Mike Doherty, a Republican from the state’s rural northwest.

“We’re asking Governor Murphy to allow religious services to resume in New Jersey in a thoughtful fashion. It’s the right thing to do, both constitutionally and morally,” Doherty said April 19. In his view, “it’s possible for religious services to resume if reasonable precautions are put in place.”

New Jersey has suffered over 5,000 coronavirus-related deaths as of Wednesday, with over 95,000 known cases statewide. It neighbors New York state, where 250,000 confirmed coronavirus cases include over 15,000 deaths, with New York City the worst-hit urban area in the United States.

Doherty emphasized the benefits of religious gatherings in a time of crisis.

“When many of us could be at Sunday services today replenishing a much needed sense of hope in these uncertain times, we instead remain separated in our homes from the communities of faith that sustain us in good times and bad,” he said.

Doherty has launched an online petition for New Jersey residents who wish to share with the governor “their belief that religion is an essential service and constitutionally protected right that should be allowed to resume immediately.” By 7 p.m. local time Wednesday, the petition had more than 1,700 signatures.

Margiotta, the Newark archdiocese spokeswoman, did not address the petition directly. However, she said Catholic churches would reopen only with the decision of the local bishop.

“The process of how and when to reopen churches will be determined by the ordinary and his diocesan staff,” she said. “The well-being and safety of our clergy, staff, and parishioners remain a priority, and the archdiocese will continue to review guidance from federal and state officials as plans to reopen are considered. Although church buildings remain closed, our prayers and celebration of Mass continue via livestream so that we may remain united as one Church and one people amid this ongoing pandemic.”

Last week, Gov. Murphy cited a Harvard University study published in the journal Science as saying social distancing measures might need to last through 2022. Any sports or entertainment gatherings, and possibly high school and college graduations, might need to be held virtually without anyone in the audience.

“I don’t see a normal, even if it were to take place, a normal gathering in the foreseeable future. I just don’t see it,” he said April 15, according to New Jersey 101.5. “I’ll be the happiest guy on the planet if I’m wrong.”

“This is a war. It is the fight of our lives. Wars are not won by one person or one small group. They’re won when millions of people come together in a common cause,” he said. “Our cause right now is totally flattening the curve and then seeing it drop down the other side. Then we can begin the process responsibly along with our neighbors of reopening our state and beginning to live life in our new normal.”

“This is no time to let up. We have got to keep at it,” he said, stressing the need for cases of coronavirus to fall to “a manageable reality” where experts can reconsider social distancing measures. Murphy emphasized “a responsible re-opening” with health care infrastructure and protocols that “frankly, we don’t have at the moment.”

Such protocols include fast and accurate coronavirus testing and the ability to trace the contacts of infected people to prevent contagion from spreading. Citing discussions with experts, Murphy said he thought a vaccine for the COVID-19 virus was unlikely earlier than a year or a year and a half from now.

Doherty’s petition, hosted at the website of the New Jersey Senate Republicans, said people have been denied the opportunity to attend religious services that “could provide hope, solace, and a sense of community during this time of social distancing and isolation due to the coronavirus.”

According to the petition, “it is possible for churches, temples, mosques, and synagogues to operate safely through reasonable precautions, including outdoor services, social distancing, and limitations on the size of gatherings.”

The petition cited the constitutional right to practice religion that “should not be impeded through overly restrictive executive orders.”

“Governor Murphy should recognize that religious services are no less essential to people’s needs than retail services, such as lottery and liquor sales, that have been allowed to continue,” it said.

CNA sought comment from Senator Doherty but did not receive a response by deadline.

The senator is a strong advocate of lifting New Jersey limitations on small businesses, saying “the state needs to reopen sooner rather than later.”

“The cure is becoming much worse than the disease. The idea that churches will be shut down until July is unacceptable,” he said April 15, according to Insider NJ.

He objected to the governor’s refusal to allow churches to conduct “outdoor, open air services with proper spacing” while “allowing the essential service of selling more booze to desperate citizens, and allowing customers to pull up to fast food take out windows where the spacing between the customer and the server is zero inches.”

[…]