The Left’s meltdown over potential end to Roe v. Wade
The Left is in the process of engaging in an epic brat fit over the strong possibility that
Roe v. Wade, one of the most egregiously errant rulings ever handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States might finally be overturned.
A preview of coming attractions occurred during the oral arguments in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization which presents the high court with a direct challenge to the Roe decision. Denizens of the Left worked themselves into a frenzy out of concern that a more conservative, strict constructionist court will repudiate the decision which has ended the lives of untold millions of unborn Americans.
Justice Elena Kagan led the charge shredding both judicial decorum and integrity by advocating for the outcome from the bench and pre-emptively suggesting a ruling overturning Roe would be a “stain” on the court. The only actual stain on the court was her lack of judicial temperament. Pointed questioning and debate are, of course, the purpose of the proceeding. A thinly veiled attack on her fellow justices was simply unprofessional.
Another voice from the Left lacking an understanding of her proper role was the U.S. senator from New Hampshire Jeanne Shaheen who predicted there would be a “revolution” if Roe is overturned. The decision to be made is not before congress, it is before the Supreme Court. It is a violation of both the separation of powers and civility to be threatening violent consequences.
The Left has never been good at accepting decisions that cut against its orthodoxy — and preserving the perceived right to prematurely end human life has been a pillar.
Despite the sound and fury, there would appear to be at least five, perhaps six justices who are prepared to follow the constitution and right the Roe wrong. Chief Justice John Roberts is expected to try and forge some middle ground, but this is a case where the middle ground will be difficult if not impossible to find.
As Thomas Jipping and Sarah Parshall Perry of the Heritage Foundation said in an analysis: “In oral arguments today, both sides agreed that ‘half measures’ attempting to change Roe v. Wade would be unacceptable and unworkable. Even the lawyers opposing the Mississippi law failed to defend Roe v. Wade as correctly decided.”
Jipping and Perry concluded: “Nothing hurts the court’s legitimacy more than a decision like Roe v. Wade that is passed on the court’s policy views rather than on the U.S. Constitution. The arguments today reinforced the need to return abortion policy to state legislatures, whereas Mississippi Solicitor General Scott G. Stewart put it “all interests can have full voice.’”
Herein lies an important point. Despite the scaremongering from the Left predicting a return to back-alley abortions, the overturning of Roe does not outlaw abortion — it merely returns the issue to the states where the 50 legislatures can decide for themselves what policies should govern the procedure.
Melanie Israel of Heritage concluded: “Life is our most basic human right, and our laws, at all levels of government, should protect it. Policymakers should pursue policies that are rooted in modern science, acknowledge the humanity of our children in the womb, and reflect public sentiment that supports protecting unborn children. But too often, Roe V. Wade’s vague and unworkable framework is a barrier to protecting our most fundamental right. It’s long past time for the Supreme Court to change course and reject Roe so states and the American people can address this country’s outdated and extreme abortion laws.”
The loud voices of the Left should be ignored, and cooler heads grounded in adherence to the constitution should prevail. If so, Roe v. Wade will join Plessy v. Ferguson (which erroneously upheld racial segregation) on the ash heap of history.