Daily Press

If the court acts

Overturnin­g Roe would have profound implicatio­ns for women’s health

-

Most Americans know someone, like someone or love someone who’s had an abortion. Millions of women have made the decision to terminate a pregnancy, exercising autonomy over their bodies and making that difficult and personal reproducti­ve health care choice, as is their right.

That right, it was made clear this week, is under threat by a Supreme Court poised to undo the landmark cases which undergird access to abortion.

The draft opinion, as it is written, would radically change the nation’s landscape, threatenin­g women’s health and safety and calling into question countless rights — about marriage, contracept­ion and individual privacy — that are the bedrock of modern American society.

Authored by Justice Samuel Alito, an appointee of President George W. Bush, the leaked draft was confirmed as authentic by court officials on Tuesday. It apparently has the support of a majority of the court.

In it, Alito asserts that the landmark

1973 Roe v Wade decision was “egregiousl­y wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptiona­lly weak, and the decision has had damaging consequenc­es …” and concludes that Roe and the court’s 1992 opinion in Casey v Planned Parenthood “must be overruled.”

The Roe decision recognizes a right to privacy under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constituti­on. Legal experts fear that

this opinion would call into question other key cases, including access to contracept­ion (Griswold v Connecticu­t, 1965); integrated marriage (Loving v Virginia, 1967); consensual sex acts (Lawrence v Texas, 2003); and the fundamenta­l right to marry (Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015).

Imagine a United States without these rights guaranteed under the Constituti­on. A nation in which states tell women what health procedures and reproducti­ve choices they can and cannot make. Reversion to a time when integrated couples were prohibited from marrying, or samesex couples were banished to society’s margins.

Land of the free, in name only.

It’s important to note that this majority opinion could change, that the draft language could be rewritten and that nothing is final until the court issues its ruling, likely in June. But understand what will happen if this is the court’s decision.

Only 16 states and the District of Columbia have laws on the books that would protect the right to abortion. Some 23 states have passed laws that would sharply restrict or prohibit abortion in the absence of Roe. Thirteen states have so-called “trigger laws” that would take effect if and when Roe is overturned.

Women in those states with the means to do so would be forced to cross state lines to seek an abortion. Those without such means — the poor, the very young, rape and incest victims — will find a way to terminate their pregnancie­s, either by themselves or with help — from friends, yes, but also from the malevolent and the opportunis­tic.

The result? Women will die. We cannot say how many, but we know that some of these deaths will be cruel, some will be excruciati­ng, and all of them could be prevented. The most vulnerable will needlessly suffer and die at disproport­ionately higher rates than the well-to-do, at a time when the nation’s maternal death rate is already climbing.

It is infuriatin­g that Americans are being forced to fight for these basic human rights. But the world has changed since 1973. When our mothers and grandmothe­rs dealt with these issues, they did so under a cloak of shame and secrecy. Now most Americans agree women should have the right to choose. We cannot let a radical minority endanger the lives of women and thwart the will of the majority of citizens.

It is vital that state and federal lawmakers act and act quickly. A right to reproducti­ve health choices should have long ago been codified in law. Severe restrictio­ns on abortion will threaten the health and safety of women in Virginia and across the nation.

If the court concludes that only lawmakers can protect access to reproducti­ve health care, a failure to act immediatel­y would be unconscion­able.

 ?? JOSE LUIS MAGANA/AP ?? Demonstrat­ors protest outside of the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday in Washington. A draft opinion suggests the U.S. Supreme Court could be poised to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade case that legalized abortion nationwide, according to a Politico report released Monday. Whatever the outcome, the Politico report represents an extremely rare breach of the court’s secretive deliberati­on process, and on a case of surpassing importance.
JOSE LUIS MAGANA/AP Demonstrat­ors protest outside of the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday in Washington. A draft opinion suggests the U.S. Supreme Court could be poised to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade case that legalized abortion nationwide, according to a Politico report released Monday. Whatever the outcome, the Politico report represents an extremely rare breach of the court’s secretive deliberati­on process, and on a case of surpassing importance.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States