An appalling attack on the rights of women

It arrived like lightning in the night, the leaked draft ruling from the Supreme Court of the United States that would overturn the Roe v. Wade decision that has guaranteed abortion rights in that country for almost 50 years.

It illuminated, once again, the deep social rifts bedevilling America and the waning faith in its most important institutions.

Abortion will likely always be a flashpoint in the puritanical zones of American life, even if, decades after Roe v. Wade, it had seemed to be settled law.

For half a century, the Christian right and, more recently, the zealots of the new Republican party have railed against it.

Now, that doggedness and the increasingly overt partisanship of the top court — purposely stacked by Republicans during the Trump administration with anti-abortion judges — has set the stage for what would be a crushing blow to women’s fundamental rights.

If the final decision does turn out the way the leaked version suggests, it will also be a blow to the court, whose standing has been eroding for decades.

Since the appointment of Clarence Thomas to the court in 1991, despite allegations of sexual harassment by Anita Hill, and again in 2020 with sexual assault allegations against nominee Brett Kavanagh, there have been concerns about the character of judges.

Since 2000, and the case of Bush v. Gore that determined the presidency, there have been worries about its politicization.

Up to half the states of the union are likely to ban abortion if the Supreme Court does strike down Roe v. Wade, forcing women there to seek abortions illegally, putting their lives and health at risk, or travel long distances — if they can afford it.

As always, the poor and women of colour are sure to suffer the most. They are the ones who would most likely be forced to continue unwanted pregnancies, with consequences for their physical and mental health, or resort to illegal abortion services. They will risk being criminalized, or worse.

None of this is happening because Americans suddenly had a change of heart about abortion. Only about 20 per cent oppose abortion in all circumstances, and a recent poll showed two-thirds support upholding Roe v. Wade.

It’s about a radical minority using the top court as a lever to impose its views on the majority. As a result, the debate is bound to continue even if the court’s final decision is in line with the leaked draft.

If that happens, said U.S. President Joe Biden, abortion rights would have to be codified in federal legislation. And overturning Roe v. Wade is bound to have a big impact on mid-term elections in the fall, giving beleaguered Democrats, especially women, an animating issue.

The odd notion, expressed in the draft decision by Justice Samuel Alito, that rights must be “deeply rooted in history” if the court is to uphold them has also put those who fought for gay marriage and against bans on interracial marriage on high alert that those gains may also be in danger.

They, too, could be kicked back to the states and be left to the mercy of conservative legislators.

In Canada, criminal law is a federal matter and to make abortion illegal a bill would have to pass through Parliament.

The challenge in Canada has been to ensure that abortion services — which fall under provincial jurisdiction — are accessible in all parts of the country.

Conservative MPs were ordered to remain silent on the uproar in the U.S.

But Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland warned that women in Canada cannot take their rights for granted and “need to be active, vigilant and speak out.”

But if Freeland wants to put muscle behind those words, her government has work to do.