JSRG:
Who cares? That was 50 years ago.
RW was reaffirmed by Casey in 1992 by an all Republican court.
Which was nearly 30 years ago. A little better than 50 years, but still an awfully long time ago. (also, technically not all of them were nominated by Republicans… White was a pre-Roe Democrat appointee, but on the other hand he did vote to strike down Roe v. Wade entirely and was one of the original dissenters)
Though it should be noted Roe was only affirmed in a loose sense in Casey. While it proclaimed the “central holding” of some right to an abortion was correct, it narrowed it noticeably. The original Roe was far more broad in banning abortion regulation.
But again, to get someone on the Supreme Court, they have to pass the Senate. So while Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, and Thomas were nominated by a Republican, they had to pass through a Democratic-controlled Senate (and Thomas only barely made it through).
Kennedy and Souter are the ones that especially concern us. Originally Reagan nominated Bork, but he infamously got “borked” by the Democratic-controlled Senate and thus Reagan nominated Kennedy, who did pass the Senate. Kennedy upheld (but limited) Roe, whereas Bork would’ve been a nearly guaranteed vote to overturn it entirely. If, during Casey, Bork was in Kennedy’s seat, then it would have likely come out the other way. And the blame for the fact Kennedy was there instead goes to the Democrats.
Kennedy is not the only upholder of Roe where you can blame the Democratic-controlled Senate for. The effect of the Democratic Senate on Souter is less obvious, but still there. With the Bork/Kennedy affair recent, and facing another Democratic-controlled Senate, Bush took a gamble by nominating Souter, who had very little of a “paper trail” in deciding controversial issues like abortion. The hope was that without much to object to, Democrats would let him through and then he’d be a conservative judge. It succeeded in getting him on the court, it did not work so well in getting a conservative judge, as shown with him joining Kennedy and O’Connor in upholding (but still limiting) Roe.
Granted, you can’t blame the Democrats for O’Connor, as she was nominated by a Republican president and confirmed by a Republican Senate. Still, if not for the Democrats, we would’ve seen other people in place of Kennedy and Souter, who would have been a whole lot more likely to overturn Roe entirely–and remember, only 1 more vote was necessary in Casey to do that.
If you look at the history leading up to Casey, it’s pretty obvious that it was the Republicans (at least starting with Reagan) were taking steps to overturn Roe, but they were thwarted in their attempts by the Democrats. But even then, they still succeeded in limiting it.
This page also has some good information on this:
https://www.jamesjheaney.com/2020/10/20/do-democratic-presidencies-reduce-abortions/
Neither major party deserves Catholic support. I have to vote for individuals instead of party lines.