Couric: Do you think there’s an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?
Palin: I do. Yeah, I do.
Couric: The cornerstone of Roe v. Wade.
Palin: I do.
As Ambinder notes, “right to privacy” is the foundational legal notion on which Roe is based. What’s more, it’s “right to privacy” that has led to several other effronts to our liberty such as securing the right for a guy to put his hot dog in another guy’s bun. But why take my word for it? Here’s Focus on the Family, an advocacy organization founded by James Dobson, who had previously endorsed Huckabee and has since warmed to McCain:
For example, when a court “finds” a “right of privacy” hidden in the “penumbras” and “emanations” of the Constitution, and later expands this “right of privacy” into the right to abortion; that’s judicial activism. Here are some other examples:
- When a court rules that the First Amendment (“Congress shall make no law … “) suddenly means that “the states shall make no law” and creates a new constitutional “wall of separation” between church and state;
Now, surely Sarah Palin doesn’t believe in “right to privacy” in the same way the Roe court did. Indeed, it was just Sarah Palin’s selection as running mate that encouraged Dobson to support McCain anyway. The more enlightening thing is that she simply had no idea what the phrase meant in the context of the Court. Not top notch stuff.