The Dec. 1 oral arguments before the Supreme Court pertaining to Mississippi’s draconian law attacking abortion rights in this country, brought to light the poor decision making by Sen. Susan Collins.
In her grandstanding October 2018 speech, where she announced her support for Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination, she specifically cited then-Judge Kavanaugh’s overwhelming respect for precedent and went a step further, stating that his approach toward the doctrine of severability is narrow. “When a part of a statute is challenged on constitutional grounds, he has argued for severing the invalid clause as surgically as possible while allowing the overall law to remain intact,” she said.
That’s not what we witnessed last week with his vacuous arguments that the court should remain neutral when it comes to constitutional rights. I’m still trying to wrap my mind around that nonsense.
Frank DAgostino
Harpswell
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less