In the latest installment of her grilling by Katie Couric of CBS, Sarah Palin explained her complaint with Roe v. Wade, but could not name another US Supreme Court decision she opposed.
The Republican vice presidential candidate opposes abortion, including in cases of rape or incest, and in the interview aired this evening said that the ruling legalizing abortion nationwide impinged on states' rights.
"I think it should be a states' issue, not a federal government -- mandated -- mandating yes or no on such an important issue," Palin said. "I’m in that sense a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas. Now foundationally, also, though, it’s no secret that I’m pro life that I believe in a culture of life is very important for this country. Personally that’s what I would like to see further embraced by America."
Asked by Couric what other high court decisions she disagrees with, Palin replied, "Well, let’s see. There’s –of course –in the great history of America rulings there have been rulings, that’s never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are–those issues, again, like Roe v Wade where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So you know–going through the history of America, there would be others but–"
"Can you think of any?" Couric interjected.
"Well, I could think of–of any again, that could be best dealt with on a more local level. Maybe I would take issue with. But you know, as mayor, and then as governor and even as a Vice President, if I’m so privileged to serve, wouldn’t be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today," Palin answered.
Couric asked the same questions of Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden, who said he opposed a Supreme Court decision throwing out a domestic violence law.
"You know, I’m the guy who wrote the Violence Against Women Act," Biden answered. "And I said that every woman in America if they are beaten and abused by a man should be able to take that person to court. Meaning you should be able to go to federal court and sue in federal court the man who abused you if you can prove that abuse. But they said no that a woman, there’s no federal jurisdiction and I held, they acknowledged, I held about 1,000 hours of hearings proving that there’s an effect in interstate commerce. Women who are abused and beaten and beaten are women who are not able to be in the work force. And the Supreme Court said there is an impact on commerce but this is federalizing a private crime and we’re not going to allow it. I think the Supreme Court was wrong about that decision."
About Political Intelligence
Glen Johnson is Politics Editor at boston.com and lead blogger for "Political Intelligence." He moved to Massachusetts in the fourth grade, and has covered local, state, and national politics for over 25 years. E-mail him at firstname.lastname@example.org. Follow him on Twitter @globeglen.