...Anti-women, anti-women's-reproductive-rights (yeah I may seem a little late at this but still). What did you expect out of judge nominated by Bush? Women's reproductive rights truly are endanger. Don't believe me? Take a look at his record...because history repeats itself. (via NARAL Pro-Choice America)

--As Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts argued in a brief before the U.S. Supreme Court (in a case that did not implicate Roe v. Wade) that “[w]e continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled…. [T]he Court’s conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion… finds no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution.”

--In Rust v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court considered whether Department of Health and Human Services regulations limiting the ability of Title X recipients to engage in abortion-related activities violated various constitutional provisions. Roberts, appearing on behalf of HHS as Deputy Solicitor General, argued that this domestic gag rule did not violate constitutional protections.

--Roberts, again as Deputy Solicitor General, filed a “friend of the court brief for the United States supporting Operation Rescue and six other individuals who routinely blocked access to reproductive health care clinics, arguing that the protesters behavior did not amount to discrimination against women even though only women could exercise the right to seek an abortion.

--The Court was so accustomed to the Solicitor General and the Deputy Solicitor General arguing for the overturn of Roe that during John Robertss oral argument before the Supreme Court in Bray, a Justice Asked, Mr. Roberts, in this case are you asking that Roe v. Wade be overruled? He responded,No, your honor, the issue doesnt even come up. To this the justice said, Well, that hasnt prevented the Solicitor General from taking that position in prior cases.

Women's reproductive rights (*autonomy*)--a fundamental part of our human rights--are not political toys, to be played with by anti-women politicians and judges. You deny women their *right* to control their reproductive destinies, you deny the existence of women's humanity, our right to be seen as autonomous human beings and full equal citizens in the eyes of the Law, and our human rights altogether. They should start debating on whether or not to overturn the Nineteenth Amendment as well, since our rights and civil liberties are just that easily discarded. *We* are just that inconvenient. Call it hysterical, irrational, and absurd--the Democrats are already looking as if they'll cop-out all together (as they have been doing for years). But no doubt, the radical anti-choice ideological groups and neoconservative Republican politicians know they hold a firm control over all three branches of government now. They have made it clear that they will do whatever they damn well please within Congress and the Judiciary, without fear of an actual revolt from the Democrats. We've come to ahead at last. Good thing that I'm young and ready. It's time for us Third-Wavers to finally prove ourselves.