Perspectives on the Dodd Decision Overruling
Roe v. Wade
American Thinker,
by
Clarice Feldman
Original Article
Posted By: pensom2,
6/26/2022 6:55:30 AM
There has been much perfervid shouting and rending of garments (or these days, parading about with red splotches on the crotches of their clothing or performative displays in Handmaid's Tale costumes -- red hooded capes) to protest the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. On the other hand, those opposed to abortion hail this decision, claiming abortions will end or be much reduced. Neither side is right. I believe the decision will not substantially lessen the number of abortions. On the other hand, I do think that it signals a significant retreat from the days when
Reply 1 - Posted by:
spacer 6/26/2022 7:50:02 AM (No. 1197287)
Clarice clarifying the morass. We will now see if America can rekindle her federalism as a moral Judeo/Christian centered nation.
10 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
planetgeo 6/26/2022 7:50:07 AM (No. 1197288)
Clarice, as always, nails it. Very simple and straightforward. The Supreme Court, correctly, reaffirms federalism and the rightful power of the states. AND Merrick Garland must be impeached for utter failure to apply equal justice to all.
15 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Echohawk 6/26/2022 7:54:49 AM (No. 1197294)
I agree. The feds have been scolding and demonizing individuals such has Gov. Ron Desantis for years because he won't bend to the federal government's will. The repealing of Roe means state governments will have more influence in the rights of their citizens. We'll see more governors throw off CRT and unisex bathrooms in schools. We'll see upper-level math classes make a comeback. The feds have been gobbling up more and more power since FDR. The pendulum is swinging back.
21 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
lakerman1 6/26/2022 7:56:46 AM (No. 1197296)
I have been around since FDR's second term, and this is the first time I heard a president attack the integrity of the Supreme Court or a decision rendered by it. Correct me if I am wrong.
10 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 6/26/2022 7:58:30 AM (No. 1197297)
For decades, progressives have used the courts, especially the SCOTUS, to advance their agenda. Law abiding Conservatives found themselves without effective recourse. Voting in Republicans would have no immediate impact on a SCOTUS decision. Overriding Roe would take significant and brave determination. Think of the sequence of events that happened against the odds. Trump was elected. Trump had an excellent approach to appointing truly Conservative Justices. Trump had a reasonably solid Senate and McConnell, who, despite his numerous flaws, DID maneuver Trumps picks to confirmation. Finally, 3 Justices were replaced, swing the court to a 5-4 Conservative majority, without the squeamish Roberts.
NOW the SCOTUS in unavailable for progressives to use. Further, it is undoing, almost eagerly, progressive mistakes of years past. The only available tool for progressives is an incompetent president and his clown administration. Garland may drag his feet but if he steps too far outside his legal bounds, he could be impeached after November. For the next steps of reigning in progressive insanity, elections DO matter, RIGHT NOW. First in 2022 to regain Congress and do what can be done to lock out Brandon's agenda and investigate the illegalities he has foisted upon us. Then in 2024, to retire the dems from the presidency, hopefully for a LONG time.
10 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
udanja99 6/26/2022 8:18:35 AM (No. 1197314)
I pray that Clarice is wrong on this decision increasing the number of abortions and hope that it will force girls and women to be more responsible about using birth control (which is free under 0bamacare) and abstinence.
12 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
Lazyman 6/26/2022 8:31:26 AM (No. 1197323)
In brief the majority says there is no right to abortion or the abolishing of it found in the constitution, not even under the due process clause under historical considerations. Under the tenth amendment the states should decide.
The minority says what happens if gun laws are sent back to the states. Clearly guns are part of the constitution so I must be missing the logic of this or as I suspect the minority are not actually legal scholars.
8 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Krause 6/26/2022 8:40:35 AM (No. 1197331)
If you’ve ever wondered why the Founding Fathers only gave few responsibilities to the Federal government, all you’d have to do is look at what we have today. The Federal government is on steroids, screwing up most things. That’s why they left most things to the states, to avoid the likes of people like Biden, Schumer and Pelosi ‘ruling’ and making messes to achieve more power for themselves and their party.
12 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
Kutchk 6/26/2022 8:59:18 AM (No. 1197348)
A house divided cannot stand
5 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Quigley 6/26/2022 9:13:56 AM (No. 1197364)
I am reading the opinion but haven’t yet finished doing so, so my observations may be incomplete.
I read the opinion as saying that Roe was always shaky - it was redefined in a subsequent opinion (Casey) - and that the Court had warned both sides of the argument to reach a settled ceasefire and to not keep bringing these cases to the Court.
In Dobbs, the MS law generally prohibits an abortion in the case of a “probable gestational age” of more than 15 weeks. The people attacking the law said that either Roe (or Casey) was in full force and the MS law was unconstitutional and that Roe would have to be reversed to strike down the law.
In other words the plaintiffs were adamant that there was no middle ground - a sort of “go ahead, reverse it if you dare.” They couldn’t be happy with reasonable limits.
Roberts proposed a middle ground apparently saying that 15 weeks was a reasonable amount of time to give the female to assert her constitutional right.
I think the dims wanted it to get reversed for the fund raising and to have furious radicals in the streets- their newest constituency (they think).
Thomas warned litigants that there are other similar opinions on shaky ground, eg, gay marriage. Let’s see if the dims dare the Court to reverse more of these cases.
They’ve been warned but they need the money and want their furious children out of the house and into the streets.
4 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
MDConservative 6/26/2022 9:37:35 AM (No. 1197392)
State governments are generally as corrupt as any other on smaller-scale issues. There is a slew of state legislators who rue this decision because it will now fall to them, and that can create problems, big problems for re-election. Anyone who thinks state government is "better" than the Feds need only look to California, Maryland, New York, Illinois, or add your own to the list.
Those states that totally ban abortion, many based on century-old laws, will be under the most pressure. The purists will demand support for the total ban, while the abortionists will demand unfettered access to their abattoir. And those who demand protection from "moment of conception" must then outlaw several forms of contraception, including the pill, which do not prevent egg and sperm from joining, i.e. moment of conception. Ready for that fight? What do you think a competitive state legislative seat will now cost when the special interests start with their money bombs?
Abortion, like gun control, is a money churn for many, from political activists to providers and everything in between. This will never be settled because there is no political desire to turn off the money spigots. Our Federal electeds will still be targets for action. Our state electeds will take on more pressure, demanding more cash to defend whatever view. Money is perversion in politics...and state governments are cheaper to buy.
4 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
czechlist 6/26/2022 9:38:24 AM (No. 1197395)
Really, Clarice, "perfervid"? odds are that 2% or less of readers are familiar with the word. Why must media write and talk beyond the average American's vocabulary and comprehension? Who are you trying to impress? KISS !!
3 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
DVC 6/26/2022 9:55:40 AM (No. 1197409)
FTA:
"it signals a significant retreat from the days when the Supreme Court creatively crafted imaginary rights to strip the states of their constitutional role. Federalism is back. "
Yes, precisely so.
And she is correct that Garland is a perfect example of an AG who has earned an impeachment.
8 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
red1066 6/26/2022 10:02:10 AM (No. 1197416)
Correct. All the protesting is all theater. Abortions will still performed. The issue is now in the hands of state voters where it was supposed to be from the beginning. All the screaming young white women can go home as can all the guys protesting with them who hope that by showing support, they might get laid.
5 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
earlybird 6/26/2022 10:36:59 AM (No. 1197439)
Clarice cuts to the chase:
Neither side is right. I believe the decision will not substantially lessen the number of abortions. On the other hand, I do think that it signals a significant retreat from the days when the Supreme Court creatively crafted imaginary rights to strip the states of their constitutional role. Federalism is back.
I also believe the attorney general’s response to the rioting and threats by Roe proponents and to the Bruen decision on gun ownership reveals him as a man insufficiently respectful of the Supreme Court and unwilling to perform his sworn duty to impartially enforce the law. He deserves to be impeached.
Yes, yes and yes...
4 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
earlybird 6/26/2022 10:41:54 AM (No. 1197443)
Re #12, it’s called “continuing education”. We have a rich language and we have dictionaries… Does everything have to be dumbed down to the lowest level?
6 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
earlybird 6/26/2022 10:44:50 AM (No. 1197448)
FTA:
Indeed, as the Wall Street Journal editors note:
Roe was the real “exercise of raw judicial power,” as Justice Byron White put it in dissent in 1973. That’s when seven Justices claimed to find a constitutional right to abortion that is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution and had no history in American common law. The Court on Friday finally corrected its mistake, which has damaged the legitimacy of the Court and inflamed our politics for 49 years.
4 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
bad-hair 6/26/2022 11:17:54 AM (No. 1197463)
The Republic of Texas approaches.
Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, S Dakota, N Dakota, Montana, Alberta (Canada), Saskatchewan (Canada), Manitoba (Canada), and a few states along the sides. Let's go EAST. Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida.
We have every shipping port in The Gulf of Mexico and half the Atlantic and more oil than the Saudis ever dreamed of.
California and New York can print their own money. If they want to trade they can use Panama. We WILL protect our borders ,north, south, east, and west.
If you're coming to visit Texas bring your US passport with the pre-approved visitor's visa.
3 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "pensom2"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)