BUT EXPECT A LOT OF WOMEN TO
CROSS BORDERS TO GET THIS DONE.
DAGEN: JOINING ME, ANDY
MCCARTHY.
I CALLED YOU ON THE PHONE
EARLIER TODAY JUST TO TALK TO YOU.
ANDY, ROE AND THEN CASEY THAT
SUPPLANTED ROE V. WADE WERE ON
SHAKY GROUND, WERE THEY NOT?
>> THERE WE NOT BE CASEY IF ROE
WEREN’T AN INDEFENSIBLE LEGAL
ATROCITY. I FOUND IT REMARKABLE THAT THE
I FOUND IT REMARKABLE THAT THE
LEFT DEFENDED ROE AND CASEY ON
STARRY DECISIS.
THAT.
IT’S OUR DOCTRINE OF RESPECT FOR
PRECEDENT IS NOT A RULE OF
DECISION.
IT’S A TEST THAT ASKS THE
QUESTION WHICH PRECEDENT WILL WE
RETAIN.
IT’S A MULTI-PRONGED ANALYSIS.
THESE DECISIONS WERE NEVER
STABLE.
ROE DIDN’T EVEN MAKE IT 20 YEARS
BEFORE CASEY GUTTED ITS
REASONING.
WHAT DID CASEY REPLACE ROE WITH?
BASICALLY A TEST THAT SAID UNDUE
BURDEN.
DID A REGULATION POSE AN UNDUE
BURDEN ON A WOMAN’S SUPPOSED
RIGHT TO GET AN ABORTION.
THE NATURE OF THAT KIND OF A
TEST IS IT INVITED CONSTANT
CHALLENGES AND CAUSED LITIGATION
OVER ABORTION RIGHTS.
THAT’S NOT A STABLE SYSTEM.
ANY SYSTEM INVITING CHALLENGE
LIKE THAT IS NOT ONE YOU CAN SAY
YOU DETRIMENTALLY RELIED ON.
I THINK IT’S TOO UNSTABLE.
DAGEN: TO THAT QUESTION, IT’S
PEOPLE WHO ARE LIBERAL WHO
SUPPORT LEGAL ABORTION
NATIONWIDE, WHY DIDN’T THE
DEMOCRATS -- AND THEY HAD THE
OPPORTUNITY, WHY DIDN’T THEY
WHICH JOE BIDEN IS CALLING FOR
NOW, WHY DIDN’T THEY LEGALIZED
IT NATIONWIDE.
GO THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE?
WERE THEY NOT PAYING ATTENTION
TO THE SHAKY LEGALITY OF ROE AND
CASEY?
>> THE DIRTY LITTLE SECRET IS
THE DEMOCRATS LIKE CALLING IT
ROE BECAUSE THAT KEEPS THEM OUT
OF THE DETAILS.
WHEN YOU ASKED PEOPLE IF YOU
WANT TO SEE ROE OVERTURNED,
PEOPLE THINK IT IS THE
LEGALIZATION OF ABORTION.
WHAT I THINK THEY ARE GOING TO
FIND NOW THAT WE ARE GOING TO
HAVE A DEMOCRATIC DISCUSSION OF
THIS.
WHAT WE ARE GOING TO END UP WITH
IS SOMETHING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
WILL BE MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE
WITH THAN ROE.
ROE WAS BASICALLY ANY ABORTION
ANY TIME UP UNTIL THE MOMENT OF
DELIVERY COULD BE JUSTIFIED
UNDER THAT LINE OF CASES.
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY AND LARGE
LIKE THE PEOPLE IN THE CIVILIZED
WORLD -- I’M PERSONALLY OPPOSED
TO ABORTION.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE ATTITUDES OF
PEOPLE, MANY PEOPLE TAKE THE
POSITION THEY DON’T LIKE IT BUT
THEY THINK IT SHOULD BE READILY
AVAILABLE AND HEAVILY REGULATED.
IF YOU GET TO MAKE YOUR OWN
ABORTION LAW, YOU GET TO IMPOSE
THAT KIND OF A SYSTEM.
I DON’T THINK DEMOCRATS WANTED TO HAVE THAT ARGUMENT.
TO HAVE THAT ARGUMENT.
I THINK THEY WANTED TO DEMAGOGUE
PEOPLE INTO THINKING THE SUPREME
COURT DECISION WOULD MAKE
ABORTION ILLEGAL WHEN ALL IT
DOES IS RETURN IT TO WHERE IT
SHOULD HAVE BEEN DECIDE ALL
ALONG, THE STATES.
DAGEN: THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL"
HAD A MAP OF WHERE ABORTION IS
LEGAL.
THERE ARE STATES WHERE ACCESS TO
ABORTION ARE PROTECTED.
THERE ARE 38% OF REPRODUCTIVE
WOMEN WHO LIVE IN THOSE STATES.
SO THAT TAKES YOU TO ROUGHLY 60%
OF THE WOMEN OF REPRODUCTIVE AGE
HAVE LEGAL ACCESS TO ABORTION.
THAT COULD CHANGE.
39% IN STATES WHERE IT’S A NEAR
TOTAL BAN.
JUST REALLY QUICKLY, ANDY, I
HAVE A COUPLE MORE QUICK THINGS
TO ASK YOU.
PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED THIS
DECISION LEADS TO THE
OVERTURNING OF GRISWOLD ON
CONTRACEPTION AND ON THE
LEGALIZATION OF GAY MARRIAGE,
AND THAT JUSTICE THOMAS DID SAY
IN HIS CONCURRING OPINION, HE
WROTE THAT THE LINE OF CASES
RELATED TO ROW WHICH UNDER THE
CONSTITUTION RECOGNIZE RIGHTS TO
BIRTH CONTROL, STRUCK DOWN
SODOMY LAWS, SHOULD BE OVERRULED
AS WELL.
I KNOW KAVANAUGH DIDN’T WRITE
THAT AND ALITO DIDN’T WRITE
THAT.
KAVANAUGH IN HIS CONCURRING
OPINION.
WERE YOU SURPRISED HE WROTE
THAT?
AND TALK ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE’S
CONCERNS OTHER CASES FALL OR ARE
OVERTURNED BY THIS COURT.
>> I’M NOT SURPRISED HE WROTE IT
BECAUSE IT’S A VERY HONEST GUY.
THE REASON THE COURT IN THE
MAJORITY OPINION FELT IT HAD TO
BE EMPHATIC IN SAYING WE ARE
ONLY TALKING ABOUT ABORTION HERE
AND FETAL LIFE IS DIFFERENT FROM
OTHER LINES OF AUTHORITY.
THE REASON THEY FELT THEY HAD TO
SAY IT IS THE LOGIC OF THEIR
DECISION DOES SEEM TO PUT THOSE
OTHER PRECEDENTS IN DOUBT.
I THINK EVERYBODY SHOULD BE
HONEST ABOUT THAT.
THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS NO ONE
IS PRECIPITATION OVER THEM
SELVES TO WRITE A PIECE OF OF
LAW THAT WILL CHALLENGE
GRISWOLD.
DEMOCRATICALLY, THAT’S NOT WHERE
PEOPLE ARE AT.
THE COURT I THINK BY
EMPHATICALLY SAYING IT’S ONLY
ABOUT ABORTION, IT DOESN’T
EXTEND IN ANYTHING ELSE WAS
PRECISELY TRYING TO DEAL WITH
THAT PROBLEM.
THE REASON IT’S A PROBLEM IS
BECAUSE OF THE LOGIC OF THIS
DECISION.
YOU HAVE TO BE HONEST ABOUT WHAT
THE RAMIFICATIONS OF IT ARE.
DAGEN: MERRICK GARLAND CAME OUT
WITH THIS STATEMENT ABOUT
TRAVELING OVERSTATE LINES.
JUSTICE CALVED FALSE CONCURRING
OPINION TOUCHES ON THAT VERY
THING.
HE SAID IN MY VIEW A STATE MAY
NOT BADGE A PERSON FROM ENTERING
ANOTHER STATE TO OBTAIN AN
AIMOARGS.
HE SAID IN MY OPINION NOP NO BAWCHES INTERSTATE COMMERCE.
BAWCHES INTERSTATE COMMERCE.
>> THE HISTORY OF ROE IS THAT IT
FURTHER POLITICIZED THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT.
IF THAT’S WHAT ATTORNEY GENERAL
GARLAND IS SAYING, THAT MEANS
ROE IS GOING OUT THE WAY IT CAME
IN.
IT’S SHEER POLITICS AND IT’S
NEVER BEEN DEFENSIBLE AS LAW.
DAGEN: THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE,