Centerfield

First Impressions from Right & Left

I've been reading both Red State and DailyKos as rough indications of what the right and left sides of the blogosphere think of a rumored Edith Clement nomination. (Actually, that sampling probably works pretty well, because both are leading activist centers for the right and left -- there are tons of liberal and conservative blogs, but Kos and Red State cater to the hard-charging activist types.)

This is, I must say, truly fascinating. While there is quite a variety of opinion on both sites, there's a pretty strong current in both cases to the effect that this is "not bad", or "as good as you could expect", or even "very good", in some cases.

Those initial impressions probably result from very different sets of facts. E.g., the right is being assured behind the scenes that she's "really one of them", and the left has dug up the nugget below regarding her views on a right to privacy which lead them to believe she may uphold Roe.

This suggests that we may have someone who is surprisingly uncontroversial in the early going. But there may be some odd volatility, too, with perhaps a few on either side drawing the conclusion that she is not reliably in their camp, or perhaps not in their camp at all.

Question 1: Do you believe there is a guaranteed right to privacy in the Constitution?

Answer: The Supreme Court has made clear that the Constitution guarantees a right to privacy.

Question 2: What are the elements of that right?

Answer: The elements of the right to privacy depend on the aspect of that right at issue in a particular case. Different factual situations call for different definitions of privacy. The Supreme Court has made it clear that the right to privacy exists in multiple facets of a person's life. For example, the right to privacy found in the First Amendment focuses on a person's right to make certain personal decisions without government interference. The right found in the Fourth Amendment gives heightened protection to what a person does in the sanctity of the home.

Question 2A: What is your approach to constitutional interpretation where the text of the constitution is ambiguous?

Answer: I would, of course, be bound by Supreme Court precedent and would evaluate the decisions of other courts. The history, text, and purpose of the provisions should be studied as well as considerations of how the text should be applied to the specific facts and circumstances.

Question 2B: Do you believe the constitution contemplates a "right to privacy"?

Answer: Yes, as I stated in my responses to the follow-up questions asked by Senator Kohl, I do believe that the Constitution contemplates a right to privacy. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the Constitution encompasses a right to privacy.

Question 2C: Do you believe the constitutional right to privacy encompasses a woman's right to have an abortion?

Answer: The Supreme Court has clearly held that the right to privacy guaranteed by the constitution includes the right to have an abortion. The cases handed down by the Supreme Court on the right to abortion have reaffirmed and redefined this right, and the law is settled in that regard. If confirmed, I will faithfully apply Supreme Court precedent.