October 01, 2008
roe v. wha?
We've had advance notice for the last few days that in the Sarah Palin interview with Katie Couric, Palin was unable to name another Supreme Court case besides Roe v. Wade. Troubling, yes, but it unfortunately eclipsed a more troubling answer, which occurred when Couric asked Palin if she thought there was a "right to privacy" to be found in the Constitution. Despite that Palin had just finished saying that she disagreed with Roe v. Wade, she answered "yes," that there is a right to privacy to be found in the Constitution.
The unenumerated "right to privacy," found in the due process clause of the 14th Amendment, is, of course, the underlying basis for Roe v. Wade--ask any self-described "strict constructionist" conservative, as they've been howling at the moon for years over this.
Thus, if Palin actually knew what she was agreeing to, she'd also know that her agreement and disagreement are entirely incompatible. Obviously I'm giving her too much credit (when Couric even reminded her that Right to Privacy is the cornerstone of Roe v. Wade). I think she simply thought that right to privacy sounded neat--who doesn't like privacy?
The beginning of the clip below shows Biden discussing Roe v. Wade with Couric as well, except that Biden has obviously read the case.
posted by scott pilutik at October 1, 2008 08:15 PM