Federal Judge John G. Roberts Jr. said yesterday that he respects the legal precedence of Roe v. Wade -- the landmark case that established federal abortion rights -- and said that overturning it would "jolt" the stability of the judiciary.
Umm. No, he said that any justice must begin with an attitude that previous Court decisions deserve respect and take social stability into consideration. Then he added that sometimes justice demands that certain decisions be overturned. Even the headline is odd. "Defends" Roe as a precedent. Does anyone say that Roe is not a precedent?
WaPo headline got it right: "Roberts Avoids Specifics on Abortion Issue."
