Kasz216 on 05 November 2008
| akuma587 said: True, but there is much more that the Supreme Court is there for than to keep Roe v. Wade in place. Look at the landmark decision not too long ago forcing the Bush Administration to give legal representation to all the detainees in Guantanomo. Hell, Obama might even get to appoint 4 justices to the court. Stevens, Kennedy (both of whom either want to leave or pretty much have to leave cause of old age), Ginsburg (78), and even Scalia (72) might all be gone. Scalia certainly doesn't want to leave, but 8 years is a long time when you are that old. But I agree the backlash would be extreme if Roe v. Wade was overturned. There are very few times I would say that something that happens in our government would provoke an assassination, but overturning Roe v. Wade would probably be one of them. Probably 20-30% of the country would be flat out enraged. |
Hey if John McCain was planning to be president for 4-8 years, Scalia can probably hold out.
There is more to the Supreme Court, but that's all people think about anyway... and really it's one of the few issues that just can't be changed via laws anyway.
I mean with Guantanomo bay... Congress could of did something once it became democratic if the SC didn't intercede.
