Opinion

Obstructionist Wendy Davis blasts “obstruction” on Scalia replacement

wendy-davis-licensed-editorial

Wendy Davis, the former Texas state Senator and failed gubernatorial candidate who rose to prominence by filibustering a ban on late-term abortion, is speaking out against Senate Republicans for wanting to delay the confirmation of a successor to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia… and setting up quite a double-standard in the process.

Scalia died last month at age 79, igniting a confrontation between President Barack Obama, who wants to name a successor as soon as possible, and leaders who demand that the Senate not approve anyone until the next president takes office next January. If a pro-life president makes the nomination, it would maintain the status quo of four (well, maybe) pro-life justices, four pro-abortion ones, and Anthony Kennedy the wild card. If Obama makes it, though, it would swing the balance of power on the court and potentially set the right to life back generations.

Naturally, disenfranchising pro-life voters on even more aspects of abortion law sounds pretty good to Davis. So on a recent Democratic National Committee conference call featuring NARAL President Ilyse Hogue, Davis complained:

Never in the history of the U.S. Senate have we seen such obstruction as we’re seeing here […] The integrity of the [Affordable Care Act] and Roe v. Wade are at stake here, and it’s certainly the case… that the GOP is cheating the American people out of having a full court to decide on these issues of national importance.

Oh, the irony. The only reason anyone outside of Texas knows her name, the reason she currently enjoys folk-hero status among pro-abortion extremists, is because of obstructionism.

She spent eleven hours filibustering pro-life legislation, attempting to deny Texans an up-or-down vote by running out the legislative clock. In doing so, she was denying the will of 62% of her state’s voters. It’s one thing to say the majority is wrong, and another to defy the people then turn around and lecture the rest of us about “cheating” them.

On that point, those who insist that “democracy” requires giving whoever Obama nominates an up-or-down vote have cited Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren’s point that the American people chose Obama in 2012… without noticing that those same people also gave the chamber that votes on nominees back to the GOP two years after that. If we’re supposed to take either election as any kind of mandate, the more recent one would logically take precedence.

It’s also too rich that Davis invokes the integrity Obamacare and Roe in the same sentence as “cheating the American people.” The public has consistently opposed the abortion-subsidizing Obamacare all along, and the very purpose of Roe is to prevent them from voting on abortion policy for themselves. And speaking of “integrity,” the Supreme Court currently upholds both by distorting the law and the Constitution.

Finally, contrary to her complaints, an 8-member court deciding these issues isn’t ideal for us, either. As Live Action’s Susan Michelle explains, an even split in the Texas case would leave HB2 in place, but not set a precedent to vindicate pro-life laws elsewhere. And even if a pro-lifer wins the White House in November and Scalia’s replacement is solidly pro-life, it will only return SCOTUS to the status quo; it won’t guarantee us judicial victory.

America is only eight months away from choosing the next president. In January, we’ll know exactly who the people would like to nominate the next Supreme Court Justice — and who they want in the Senate to review his pick. The only reason Wendy Davis and her pro-abortion ilk have for rushing the decision is to install another pro-abortion judicial activist to continue rigging the game in their favor.

READ NEXT
Comments
To Top