A Slip of the Tongue in the Supreme Court

Written by Terence P. Jeffrey

When lawyer Sarah Weddington stood up in the U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 11, 1972, to present the pro-abortion argument in the case of Roe v. Wade, she was legalistically careful in the language she used to describe whom exactly an abortion aborted.

She avoided normal human terms like “unborn child” or “baby” — and, most importantly, “person.” She preferred “fetus.”

Presumably, this was because the Fourteenth Amendment states,

“nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Shifting the Roe Burden Back to Schumer

Written by William J. Watkins, Jr.

Much like King Nebuchadnezzar’s instructions to the three Hebrew boys, U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has telegraphed to Judge Brett Kavanaugh a way out of the fiery furnace of confirmation.  Kavanaugh need not bow down to a golden image, but he must give obeisance to Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark abortion case.  “The onus is on the nominee,” Schumer has declared, “to show where he or she might stand” on Roe.  … Continue Reading