and, in fact, when katherine colbert put together the brief with with her colleagues, they asked one simple question, and it is entirely unlike any question you will see at the front of any supreme court petition for review, has the supreme court overruled roe v. wade? i mean, if you put that as a factual statement, the answer, clearly, was no. it has not overruled roe v. wade. but it was very clear that the women's rights movement thought there was a risk that the court when it addressed that issue would overturn roe v. wade. but they also had very much in mind that the fact that 1992 was a presidential election year, and they were determined to turn this lawsuit and this supreme court case into a political campaign issue. to try primarily to help bill clinton win the white house. and, in fact, there is some evidence from the political world that this case and the outcome of this case did help. but there was another aspect of katherine colbert's argument which, i think, is really enticed me into writing about it. the hardest thing that a lawyer appearing before the supreme court has

and juste kennedy was alsoçó pushing, buts you can hear in a rather deft way when catherine colbert -- katherine to your point, but i want to get backed to the standard. the argument went that way throughoutñr, and justice kenney also jumped in with a similar kind of attempt to push colbert back on to the specifics. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> the statutory provisions are not necessarily undercut in roe vs. wade. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> i am suggesting to you that that is not the only logical possibility. >> the pattern that was set earlier continue. i should mention that there were two other lawyers arguing this case, and the chapter that i wrote deal briefly with them, but the performance of catherine colbert ultimately proved the worst of her choice, because she did shake the conversation that thereafter occurred among the justices. in the end, justices kennedy, o'connor, and david souter got together and fashioned a way by which the court could sustainçó> roe vs. wade, at least in substantial part, and they did indeed strike down only that one çiÑiÑipart, the requirement tha womanjf conte

and juste kennedy was alsoçó pushing, buts you can hear in a rather deft way when catherine colbert -- katherine to your point, but i want to get backed to the standard. the argument went that way throughoutñr, and justice kenney also jumped in with a similar kind of attempt to push colbert back on to the specifics. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> the statutory provisions are not necessarily undercut in roe vs. wade. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> i am suggesting to you that that is not the only logical possibility. >> the pattern that was set earlier continue. i should mention that there were two other lawyers arguing this case, and the chapter that i wrote deal briefly with them, but the performance of catherine colbert ultimately proved the worst of her choice, because she did shake the conversation that thereafter occurred among the justices. in the end, justices kennedy, o'connor, and david souter got together and fashioned a way by which the court could sustainçó> roe vs. wade, at least in substantial part, and they did indeed strike down only that one çiÑiÑipart, the requirement tha womanjf conte