It has been interesting watching the reactions to the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Liberal Democrats seem to be confused in that they believe that a constitutional "right" has been taken away in the Supreme Court's ruling.
There is no such "right" to an abortion in the Constitution. It is also a fact that there was nothing in the Nation's history or tradition that would even suggest that such a right was ever contemplated until the Roe v. Wade decision was handed down by a divided Supreme Court almost 200 years after the Constitution was originally ratified.
The Constitution sets out specific "rights" in the document. It left other matters to the democratic process. Roe v. Wade attempted to establish a right about something that the Founders clearly meant to be decided by the voters and their representatives.
The Founders laid out a very specific construct on how additional "rights" could be added through the amendment process. It has been used to provide women the right to vote. It was used to abolish slavery. It was even used to prohibit the ability to make, distribute and consume alcohol. It then was used to reverse that prohibition.
The amendment process is not easy. It was meant to insure there was a clear consensus before our founding document was changed.
You need 2/3 of the votes in the House and Senate. You also need 3/4 of the legislatures in the states. You don't need the President's concurrence. However, if you have the votes and support of the people you can have any right (of take away any enumerated right) you want.
Many on the Left also seem to be confused on how the Supreme Court can strike down a restrictive gun law in New York but also rule that each state should have the latitude to determine its laws on abortion.
The difference is that the right to bear arms is specifically enumerated in the Constitution. The right to an abortion is not mentioned (or even hinted at) anywhere in the document.
Each state also has rights enumerated in the Constitution as set out in the Tenth Amendment.
In simple terms, the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution sets out the limits to the powers of the federal government.
Any powers that the Constitution does not give to the federal government are the states’ responsibility.
Liberals are also arguing that the Supreme Court should not be overturning the precedent that existed and was established with Roe v. Wade.
However, those same Liberals did not seem to have any problem 49 years ago when the Supreme Court ignored prior precedence when they first determined there was a right to abortion.
They also don't seem to believe that there was anything wrong when the Supreme Court in Brown vs. Board of Eduction in 1954 overturned the prior constitutionality of racial segregation under the "separate but equal" doctrine established in 1896 in Plessy v. Ferguson.
Democrats also did not seem to mind when the Supreme Court ruled there was a "right" to gay marriage seven years ago.
At the time of that ruling, 30 states had provisions in their constitutions limiting marriage to one man and one woman. Those states included California! Another seven states had statutes that banned gay marriage.
Democrats had no problem when the Supreme Court ignored these state constitutional provisions and 200 years of historical and legal precedence.
That Supreme Court ruling also overturned a federal law. "The Defense of Marriage Act" held that any spouses in a gay marriage under any state law would not be eligible for any federal benefits (Social Security, Medicare, welfare, etc.). It was clear where democracy was on this issue at that time.
It is also interesting to see Democrats who have tried to make so much of the "insurrection" of January 6 turn around and state that they will now defy the law of the land.
 |
| Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insurrection |
 |
| Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/maxine-waters-reacts-dobbs-ruling-hell-supreme-court-we-will-defy-them |
That kind of sounds like a call for insurrection.
Even worse is the Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin stating that the military is going to do what they believe is best for the military.
What?
I guess Secretary Austin forgot about the oath that all military members take upon joining the service.
That oath states that why will support and defend the Constitution of the United States.
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
This is even more troubling in that current U.S. law does not permit abortions at U.S. military facilities or the use of military insurance to pay for an abortion.except in cases where the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest or the mother's life is at risk.
Is Secretary Austin stating that the military is a higher authority than the Supreme Court when it comes to the Constitution or Congress when it involves the law?
The problem the Democrats have is they leaned on a non-legislative body to create a right in the Constitution that did not exist. A "right" that was meant to be determined by the democratic process.
Democrats had many opportunities over the last 50 years to attempt use the democratic process to give that right some type of legislative or constitutional authority.
They never even tried.
The reason they did not is they never had the votes despite times in which they had overwhelming numbers in the House and Senate and a Democrat as President.
The will of the people was simply not there on the issue.
It was easier to rely on nine justices (five is all they really needed).
When Democrat Presidents ran for office they also sounded like moderates for the same reason.
Bill Clinton said that abortion should be "safe, legal and rare."
Barack Obama used similar messaging when he ran for President and even stated early in his first term that he wanted to "reduce the number of women seeking abortions."
Joe Biden stated for decades while in public office that his Catholic faith meant that he was personally opposed to abortion but it was his duty to protect a woman's right to choose because it was the law of the land.
What about now?
On the other side of this was Donald Trump who ran for President and pledged to appoint Supreme Court justices that would follow the Constitution and not legislate from the bench.
There was no bait and switch. He told the voters what his position was and he did what he said he would do when he was elected.
Here is Trump is his final debate with Hillary Clinton in which he clearly stated what he intended to do in the appointment of justices. He also predicted that with the justices he intended to appoint that Roe v. Wade would eventually be overturned.
Trump was elected by the people and he did exactly what he promised voters he would do.
This is a clear example of democracy in action.
Some Democrats are now saying that they want to pass legislation that conforms with the Roe v.Wade decision.
However, if they do would this even be constitutional in that the Supreme Court has ruled this is a state's rights issue?
I also doubt Democrats are really serious about this in that they would clearly prefer to use this as a political issue heading into the mid-terms than trying to find a solution.
If the Democrats do move forward you can be sure the legislation would go much further than Roe v. Wade. Their radical base in the party would want to allow abortions for the entire nine months.
What would they do if a group of moderate Republicans offered to go along if abortion was limited to rape, incest and the first 12 weeks of pregnancy but no further?
This is where most of the rest of the world is that allows abortion and polling indicates that is where a majority of American voters are.
This is from a Pew Research Center poll. from May, 2022.
 |
| Source: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23167397/abortion-public-opinion-polls-americans |
The majority do not want unrestricted rights to abortion nor do they want absolute restrictions.
I would think this is where democracy will probably take us on this issue after a period of some confusion and consternation in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision.
The only problem is that Democrats have proven they do not like democracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment