Tornado Alley (PROG)

[F6]

Scalia rejects privacy rights



By Steve Benen
Mon Jul 30, 2012 7:59 AM EDT

Ordinarily, U.S. Supreme Court justices avoid television interviews, leaving the cameras for politicians. Justice Antonin Scalia apparently prefers a higher-profile approach.

Fresh off his widely-derided political antics [ http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/25/12401019-scalia-has-finally-jumped-the-shark ] towards the end of the court's last session, Scalia recently appeared [ http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/19/12835050-scalia-vs-the-gop-line-on-disclosure ] on CNN, and just 10 days later, sat down with Chris Wallace on yesterday's edition of "Fox News Sunday [ http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-news-sunday/index.html#/v/1760654457001/issues-impacting-the-us-supreme-court/?playlist_id=86913 ]."

The two covered a fair amount of ground, including Scalia's argument that there's "no way" the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate should be regarded "as a tax." (Those who can afford coverage but refuse to buy it pay a tax penalty on their tax returns.) They also touched on gun control, and Scalia's belief that firearms protected under the Second Amendment must be "hand-carried." He added, in reference to the law, "It's to keep and bear, so it doesn't apply to cannons."

What about "handheld rocket launchers that can bring down airplanes"? Scalia said it's unclear whether that's protected, and "it will have to be decided." I'll look forward to it.

But of particular interest to me was Scalia's opposition to privacy rights. Unprompted, the justice noted his opposition to reproductive rights, and it led to this exchange:

WALLACE: What about the right to privacy that the court found in known 1965?

SCALIA: There is no right to privacy. No generalized right to privacy.

WALLACE: Well, in the Griswold case, the court said there was.

SCALIA: Indeed it did, and that was -- that was wrong.

In case anyone needs a refresher on Griswold, the Supreme Court, in a 7-to-2 ruling in 1965, struck down a Connecticut law that restricted married couples' access to birth control. The court majority, in a landmark ruling, said such statutes are impermissible -- they violate Americans' right to privacy.

Yesterday's exchange didn't break new ground, but it was a noteworthy reminder that far-right jurists on the high court still have a problem with Griswold, even a half-century later.

For Scalia, if a state wants to restrict married couples' access to contraception, there are no rights afforded by the Constitution that say otherwise. "There is," he said, "no right to privacy."

It's a fanciful dream, but I'd love for this to be an issue in the 2012 presidential race.

© 2012 NBCNews.com

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/07/30/13031536-scalia-rejects-privacy-rights [with comments]


===


"Women's Choices" - Obama for America TV Ad

Published on Jul 26, 2012 by BarackObamadotcom

Learn more: http://OFA.BO/F4rtoY

Jenni's story:

Jenni:
"I've never felt this way before but it's a scary time to be a woman. Mitt Romney is so out of touch."

Voiceover:
"Mitt Romney opposes requiring coverage for contraception. And Romney supports overturning Roe versus Wade. Romney backed a bill that outlaws all abortion even in cases of rape and incest."

Jenni:
"There's so much we need to do. We need to attack our problems not a woman's choice."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33NT0_MgsVU [via http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/07/30/13033593-on-the-offensive-on-womens-rights-redux (with comments)]


===


House GOP continue fight against health care for women

The Rachel Maddow Show
July 31, 2012

Rachel Maddow talks with Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., about the Republicans’ attempts to yet again block women from accessing expanded reproductive health care.

© 2012 NBCNews.com

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/48431244#48431244


===


GOP launches 'fight-to-death rebellion' against birth control

The Rachel Maddow Show
August 1, 2012

On Wednesday, Rep. Mike Kelly’s compared women receiving expanded heath care coverage, which includes a mandate that requires insurance plans to cover birth control options, to the attacks of Pearl Harbor and the September 11, 2001 attacks. Has the GOP gone overboard on women’s health issues? MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow discusses.

© 2012 NBCNews.com

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/48454403#48454403


===


(linked in):

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=4956275 and preceding (and any future following)

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=11168025 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39551176 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=56678331 and preceding and following;
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=74072703 and preceding (and any future following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=63812946 and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=70738440 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=71987299 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=73857069 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=73982216 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=75037708 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=76024570 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=76078802 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=77045364 and preceding (and any future following)

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=77048026 and preceding and following