Skip to main content

The Glover Abortion Kerfuffle


Blumenthal -- Flicker.com

One of the many problems with neo-progressives – most especially in Connecticut – is that they never seem to know when they have won a battle.

The abortion battle in Connecticut was won in 1990 when the state incorporated into state statutes the dubious provisions of Roe v. Wade. The high court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson did not make abortion illegal, nor did it threaten abortion in the states when affirmed by legislative statutes.

The opposite is true. The court struck down a badly reasoned prior judgment and ruled that “the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.” Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg agreed that Roe v. Wade had been poorly decided long before the court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson.

The high court’s decision reversing Roe v. Wade leaves in place the Connecticut statute affirming the provisions of Roe v. Wade. That would not be the case had the high court decided that abortion was illegal.

According to Connecticut’s Office of Legislative Research (OLR), state law “1. provides that the decision to terminate a pregnancy before the fetus is viable (i.e., can live outside the mother’s womb) is solely that of the patient in consultation with the patient’s physician, advanced practice registered nurse (APRN), nurse-midwife, or physician assistant (PA); 2. prohibits abortion after viability except to preserve the pregnant patient’s life or health; and 3. establishes information and counseling requirements for minors under age 16 who seek abortions (see below) (CGS §§ 19a-601 and 19a-602 as amended by PA 22-19, § 7 and PA 22-118, § 489). The law allows physicians to perform any type of abortion. It allows APRNs, nurse-midwives, and PAs to perform medication or aspiration abortions, and specifies that these providers may perform either type of abortion in accordance with their respective licensing statutes (CGS § 19a-602 as amended by PA 22-19, § 7 and PA 22-118, § 489).”

In brief, the high court decided that state legislatures – not courts – should be able to shape laws governing abortion. The Dobbs v. Jackson decision affirms Connecticut’s 1990 statute and, importantly, offers protection against future court reversal of the statute.

Governor Ned Lamont’s State Supreme Court choice to replace a departing Associate Justice, Sandra Slack Glover, is now in trouble. In a top of the fold Hartford Courant story, “Senate could block Glover,” reporter Chris Keating notes, “Traditionally a judicial nominee by a Democratic governor is virtually guaranteed confirmation when fellow Democrats control both chambers of the legislature.”

So, what’s the beef against Glover? State Supreme Court nominee Glover had signed her name in 2017 to a letter supporting Amy Coney Barrett to become a federal appeals court judge. Glover, we may assume, was not gifted with prevision and could not know at the time that Barrett would years later join a Supreme Court that would reverse Roe v. Wade.

Glover testified before the state’s Judiciary Committee that she regretted having signed the letter, but neo-progressive legislators in the General Assembly are not interested in apologetics. They are chiefly interested in promoting issues that will add voters to the Democrat side of the political divide, and abortion rights are a hot button issue.

So then, Glover signed a letter that was partly responsible for Barrett’s elevation to a federal appeals court. Barrett later was elevated to the U.S. Supreme Court on the strength of her sterling record. The U.S. Supreme Court later ruled 1) that the prior position of the U.S. Supreme Court in their Roe v. Wade decision was irredeemably defective, and 2) that decisions regarding abortion should properly be made by state legislatures, not courts – in effect sanctioning the above Connecticut statutes supporting abortion and preventing lesser courts from overriding such decisions.

One can clearly imagine those opposing the Glover nomination as neo-McCarthyites waving their paper files and shouting in the face of a dispirited opposition, “How dare you oppose our demands!”

Connecticut has since added provisions to its neo-progressive abortion legislation. How progressive is Connecticut in the matter of abortion?

Journal Inquirer columnist Chris Powell tells us that Wesleyan University in Middletown, “a citadel of leftist groupthink,” bowing to pressure from the university’s “chapter of the Democratic Socialists … has agreed to pay for abortions for its students.” Powell concludes that “abortion fanaticism may be meant mainly as a distraction from the defects of both the national and state Democratic administrations. It presumes that clamor about abortion can induce most people to forget about inflation, forever wars, open borders, and the soaring national debt as long as there is a chance that the law somewhere might impede abortion of viable fetuses.”

Powell’s analysis is considerably sounder than America’s inflated currency.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Murphy Thingy

It’s the New York Post, and so there are pictures. One shows Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy canoodling with “Courier Newsroom publisher Tara McGowan, 39, last Monday by the bar at the Red Hen, located just one mile north of Capitol Hill.”   The canoodle occurred one day or night prior to Murphy’s well-advertised absence from President Donald Trump’s recent Joint Address to Congress.   Murphy has said attendance at what was essentially a “campaign rally” involving the whole U.S. Congress – though Democrat congresspersons signaled their displeasure at the event by stonily sitting on their hands during the applause lines – was inconsistent with his dignity as a significant part of the permanent opposition to Trump.   Reaching for his moral Glock Murphy recently told the Hartford Courant that Democrat Party opposition to President Donald Trump should be unrelenting and unforgiving: “I think people won’t trust you if you run a campaign saying that if Donald Trump is ...

The PURA soap opera continues in Connecticut: Business eyeing the exit signs

The trouble at PURA and the two energy companies it oversees began – ages ago, it now seems – with the elevation of Marissa Gillett to the chairpersonship of Connecticut’s Public Utilities Regulation Authority.   Connecticut Commentary has previously weighed in on the controversy: PURA Pulls The Plug on November 20, 2019; The High Cost of Energy, Three Strikes and You’re Out? on December 21, 2024; PURA Head Butts the Economic Marketplace on January 3, 2025; Lamont Surprised at Suit Brought Against PURA on February 3, 2025; and Lamont’s Pillow Talk on February 22, 2025:   The melodrama full of pratfalls continues to unfold awkwardly.   It should come as no surprise that Gillett has changed the nature and practice of the state agency. She has targeted two of Connecticut’s energy facilitators – Eversource and Avangrid -- as having in the past overcharged the state for services rendered. Thanks to the Democrat controlled General Assembly, Connecticut is no l...

Lamont Surprised at Suit Brought Against PURA

Marissa P. Gillett, the state's chief utility regulator, watches Gov. Ned Lamont field questions about a new approach to regulation in April 2023. Credit: MARK PAZNIOKAS / CTMIRROR.ORG Concerning a suit brought by Eversource and Avangrid, Connecticut’s energy delivery agents, against Connecticut’s Public Utility Regulatory Agency (PURA), Governor Ned Lamont surprised most of the state’s political watchers by affecting surprise.   “Look,” Lamont told a Hartford Courant reporter shortly after the suit was filed, “I think it is incredibly unhelpful,” Lamont said. “Everyone is getting mad at the umpires.   Eversource is not getting everything they want and they are bringing suit. It was a surprise to me. Nobody notified me. I think we have to do a better job of working together.”   Lamont’s claim is far less plausible than the legal claim made by Eversource and Avangrid. The contretemps between Connecticut’s energy distributors and Marissa Gillett , Gov. Ned Lamont’s ...