“Dred Scott” is Code for “Roe v. Wade”?

One of GW Bush's odder remarks last night was that he would appoint Supreme Court Justices who opposed Dred Scott. At the time it seemed an unfortuanate attempt to pick an uncontroversial example (even the hard right is against slavery) but, no, it seems it may have been code to the base.

For details, see Paperwight's Fair Shot: Dred Scott = Roe v. Wade. (via Kevin Drum)

This entry was posted in Politics: US: 2004 Election. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to “Dred Scott” is Code for “Roe v. Wade”?

  1. Pingback: Letters of Marque

  2. This came up under the previous thread on the debates, and I’ve seen it elsewhere left and right today…while I’ll certainly accept that because of its prominent place in the anti-abortion rhetoric its entirely possible that Dred Scott is the sole US Supreme Court decision of an objectionable nature Bush is aware of, but I’m just not buying the detailed code analysis…because its a lousy analogy…

    Anyone examining the history, if they give Bush the benefit of the doubt on having the courage of his convictions, and still want to wear the tin foil hat, would say its code that Bush is encouraging legislators to abrogate Roe, maybe, or for executive branch members to simply ignore it whenever possible, that’s sure what Lincoln did with Dred Scott…but as for trying to work change inside the confines of the Court? Just doesn’t fit…Lincoln had the backbone to just tell Taney to shove off, or rather to simply ignore him. No one would ever accuse Bush of that kind of courage…

  3. Brett Bellmore says:

    Actually, Lincoln had the “backbone” to order Taney arrested, though it was for a far more defensible ruling than Dred Scott. (Look up “Ex Parte Merryman” if you’re curious.) I wouldn’t recomend Lincoln’s theory of executive branch supremacy to anyone who finds dictatorship offensive.

  4. Pingback: Letters of Marque

  5. Pingback: Fiat Lux

  6. Pingback: Fiat Lux

  7. No kidding, but just the same, from a pure Machiavellian standpoint, Bush doesn’t have the guts. And Taney deserved arrest, censure, impeachment, and whatever else you can find. The guy wrote private memos declaring the emancipation proclamation and other executive actions unconstitutional just to wait for the case to pop up…can you say biased shill?

  8. Observer says:

    I’m just not buying the detailed code analysis…because its a lousy analogy

    Ok, let’s try another angle. It wasn’t an intentional code word, per se. If it had been his reply would have come acrossed as rehearsed, which it wasn’t. Instead, he mentioned the only case he could remember. Although he gets very little information that doesn’t go through a super-filter, he would definitely of heard of Dred Scott in the pro-life context.

    As support for this theory, consider that his view of what Dred Scott was about is consistent with the pro-lifer view.

  9. Just getting his work done ahead of time, I imagine; It was pretty obvious to anyone who’d ever read the Constitution, that Lincoln was grossly violating it on a daily basis, and his actions were going to wind up in front of the Supreme court sooner or later.

    You’ve got to admit, though, that it’s pretty bad when you’re at odds with Taney, and Taney is the one defending civil liberties. LOL

    —–

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.