Because I believe that Roe v. Wade was a correct interpretation of your Constitution and that only a judge whose personal views were against abortion would think otherwise, that part of his commentary gives me hope.
Can you show me where in the constitution this is interpreted from because constitutiinal scholars here cant find it. Tell us you come to this conclusion. He is saying that he has to uphold Roe vs Rade because its the law of the land. That doesnt meah he doent favor changing the law.