Revisiting rulings

I understand that our culture is in constant flux and thus the laws that govern must adapt to accommodate that change. However, the issue of abortion is universal and timeless. The federal legalization of abortion via Roe v. Wade nearly 50 years ago has not had any negative impacts on the culture; indeed, there are many positive outcomes from this decision. There is simply no reason to revisit this ruling. Nothing has changed except the composition of the Supreme

Court.

Aside from one’s personal beliefs on the morality/legality of abortion, a wider view of what the current Supreme Court is contemplating would reveal the real danger here: every law that has previously been adjudicated at the highest court in the land would now be subject to review and repeal. There need be no compelling reason such as unintended negative impacts on the citizenry to revisit a ruling that failed to favor the plaintiff/defendant. Imagine the flood of legal filings for rehearings that the court must wade through while current issues that haven’t had their day in court languish in the background.

Should the court set this precedent with Roe v. Wade, I personally would like them to revisit Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, in which the court ruled that corporations are people and therefore not subject to reasonable limits on political campaign contributions. The negative consequences of that decision are abundant.

— Marcella Seay, Magalia