Professor
Richard Garnett co-authored an amicus
curiae brief in the
United States Supreme Court, arguing that the federal ban
on partial-birth abortion is constitutional and, more specifically,
that principles of stare decisis -- as explained, in particular,
by President Lincoln -- should not prevent the Justices from
overruling their 2000 decision in Stenberg v. Carhart. The
brief opens with this paragraph:
For as long as the American public has known about partial-birth
abortion, we haveby comfortable and consistent marginsagreed
with former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan that this
gruesome practice is “infanticide, and one would
be too many.” Whether we oppose elective abortions
as a matter of moral principle or regard a woman’s
legal access to abortion as a component of ordered liberty;
whether we regard this Court’s decisions in Roe
v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey as occasions
of dramatic and damaging judicial overreaching or as
vindications of privacy and autonomy; and whatever our
views might be on a wide range of economic, social, and
political questions, we have repeatedly and overwhelmingly
concluded, in jurisdiction after jurisdiction, that partial-birth
abortion is a barbarism that may and should be prohibited.
This conclusion is entirely consistent with our shared,
abiding commitment to individual freedom under and through
the rule of law, and it is one that our Constitution
permits us to embrace. In our “democratic society,” the
debate over partial-birth abortion continues, and this
Court should not cut it short.
Professor Garnett filed the brief on behalf of the Christian
Legal Society and several other organizations, in the
case of Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood Federation
of America.
More Faculty in the News
|
