1. dispatches
  2. Brit Hume and Robert Bork

Brit Hume and Robert Bork

By stcynic on January 9, 2006.

I've had the Alito confirmation hearing on in the other room but I haven't been paying attention to them because, frankly, the opening statements by the senators on the committee are pretty much meaningless hot air. But as I was walking through the room I heard Brit Hume mention Robert Bork and I stopped for a second to catch what he said. I'm glad I did - what he said was false. He said:

"He had a reasoned position on a line of cases leading to Roe v Wade and he argued it in such a way that it gave the impression that he didn't think there was a right to privacy in the constitution. He didn't think that but it sounded like he did."

This is simply wrong. Bork has emphatically argued that there is no general "right to privacy" beyond the specific provisions of, for example, the 4th amendment. Even a cursory examination of his writings on the subject prove this true. He has repeatedly referred to the right to privacy in Griswold as a "new" or "invented" constitutional right, in no way tied to the text of the Constitution.

I actually did catch later some of Sen. Cornyn's opening remarks and they were full of ridiculous rhetoric. I hope to find the full text of them so I can have some fun with them.

Tags
Supreme Court Confirmation

More like this

Herzog on "legislating from the bench"
I just came across this excellent post by Dan Herzog at Left2Right about the common conservative rhetoric of being opposed to "legislating from the bench." When he announced the Harriet Miers nomination, President Bush declared that "Harriet Miers will strictly interpret our Constitution and laws.…
The Danger of Robert Bork
I have been challenged to defend my claim that Robert Bork is "insane". It's not a terribly artful term, I admit, and I meant it figuratively rather than literally. But I will certainly defend the assertion I've defended many times before, which is that Robert Bork's views on constitutional law are…
Interesting Exchange in Roberts Hearings
I just watched this fascinating exchange between Arlen Specter and John Roberts in the hearings. I don't have an actual transcript, however, so this is paraphrased. Specter began by asking Roberts if he recognized that there is a right to privacy in the Constitution, noting a 1981 memo that Roberts…
Kennedy's Remarks on Alito
Yesterday I highlighted the absurdities of Sen. Cornyn's opening remarks about Judge Alito's nomination. Today I think I'll point the spotlight at Sen. Kennedy on the other side of the aisle. His opening statement (scroll down) was no less ridiculous. Kennedy referred to a study by Cass Sunstein, a…

Part two, which opens with Cornyn's whinging is here.

Wouldn't it be stunningly amazing if one of the MSM streams actually discussed historical nomination proceedings?? Rather than continually rehashing Bork for example, couldn't they dig out the recorded transcripts of nominees in the early 1800's to see what they were saying about their understanding of the "power" of the US Constitution?? Or those in the late 1800's when the robber barons and their financial supporters were trying to stack the Court as they had the US Senate????

If I'm remembering this correctly, the nomination deliberations of the Senate from the early 1800s were not recorded, and are not available. Until the later 1800s, I don't think there was even a judiciary committee that reviewed nominations before making a recommendation vote, as is now generally the rule. Until the early 20th century, it was highly unusual even for a nominee to appear before a Senate committee or even meet with individual Senators. Brandeis (I think) was one of the first to really show up and defend himself and his views (he was ultimately successful).