Jury Duty Questionaire-just one more time....

A friend of mine sent me the link to this article article which appeared this morning on CatholicExchange. While the article is about the Supreme Court and Mr. Alito, it does address, in a way, "Question 45" on my jury questionaire. Here's the excerpt:

Everyone — everyone — agrees that there are times that the established law should not be respected, times when strict constructionism and a respect for legal precedent are misguided, when principle and a concern for basic human rights should trump the debate over judicial process. For example, every high school student in the country is taught that it was shameful for the Supreme Court to decide as it did in the Dred Scott decision; that returning Scott to his slave-master because he was “property” was an unforgivable adherence to the letter of the law. Similarly, we do not teach our children that the Nazi defendants at the Nuremberg trials should have been held blameless because they were abiding by the established law of the land in Germany at the time.

Let’s cut to the chase: It is not an admirable trait for a judge to state proudly that there may be times when his duty to uphold the law and respect legal precedent will make it necessary for him to decide a case in a manner that will result in the death of more unborn children. I am not saying that Samuel Alito will say anything like this in his confirmation hearings. I am confident that he will put a fine edge on this question. But many of his conservative defenders are making exactly that point.

Funny this article appeared in The Wanderer first and I missed it....