•   
  •   
  •   

Opinion Overturn Roe

13:50  18 may  2021
13:50  18 may  2021 Source:   nationalreview.com

Assaults on Roe v Wade increasing

  Assaults on Roe v Wade increasing Last week alone, governors of seven states signed laws that restrict or defy abortion rights under Roe — ripe for the new conservative Supreme Court.Last week alone, governors of seven states signed laws that restrict or defy abortion rights under Roe. That could soon give the newly reshaped U.S. Supreme Court an opportunity to chip away at or even overturn it.

It’s time to overturn Roe . On Wednesday, December 1st, the U. S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson . Legal scholars on both sides of the abortion issue agree that this could be the case that finally overturns Roe v. Wade . Learn more about this historic case , or see below for ways you can get involved!

Overturn Roe is an initiative of the Pro-Life Action League, in collaboration with Citizens for a Pro-Life Society and Created Equal.

The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear Mississippi’s appeal in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization to decide the fate of the state’s Gestational Age Act. That law, passed in 2018 and held in limbo ever since by the courts, bans abortions after 15 weeks except “in a medical emergency or in case of a severe fetal abnormality.” Nothing in the text or history of the Constitution bars such laws, and the Court should say so.

a church with a clock at the top of a building © Bill Chizek/Getty Images

Better still, it should put an end to the long charade of judge-invented abortion law. The Court should say that Roe v. Wade never had any legitimate basis in our Constitution, and return the issue to the people’s representatives. It should do so precisely because this issue is too important not to be decided by the people.

Opinion: This could be the case that takes down Roe v. Wade

  Opinion: This could be the case that takes down Roe v. Wade In agreeing to hear Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the Supreme Court (and its new conservative supermajority) are gearing up to take a direct hit on the question of abortion and the future of Roe v. Wade, says law professor Mary Ziegler.Just a week ago, it seemed hard to imagine that the Supreme Court, with its conservative supermajority, was ready for a direct attack on Roe v. Wade. After all, the justices had been considering a Mississippi abortion case since September without saying a word.

Overturning Roe would not outlaw abortion in the U.S., but would instead allow individual states to restrict abortion in the first two trimesters, according to The New York Times. Some states would enforce laws that restrict abortion, such as the six-week Trigger bans — abortion bans that would go into effect automatically if Roe is overturned — are in effect in 12 states, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Several other states have pre- Roe bans that were never removed from law, which could go

A Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade could bring abortion bans to as many as half the states in the country already poised to prohibit the procedure. Such a move would also have knock-on effects on the primarily blue states that would maintain access to abortion.

Seven men in black robes started this. For 48 years, using a shifting series of rationales — emanations from penumbras, a woman’s “own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life” — the Court has been winging it. Making up the rules has led to making up more rules: What burdens on abortion are “undue?” Should the court apply a “balancing test?” Even Chief Justice John Roberts has mocked that project: “There is no plausible sense in which anyone, let alone this Court, could objectively assign weight to such imponderable values and no meaningful way to compare them if there were.”

Meanwhile, with each passing year, modern medicine finds new ways to save babies delivered earlier and earlier, and modern science finds new ways to bring us face to face with the elementary biological fact that the unborn are individual human beings. Roe was supposed to make law rest on science instead of text and tradition, but real science accepts new discoveries. The refusal of judges and lawyers to adjust to new science is a sign that they were better off sticking to reading laws.

Long-standing hopes and fears of Roe v. Wade reversal rekindled by new Supreme Court case

  Long-standing hopes and fears of Roe v. Wade reversal rekindled by new Supreme Court case For decades, conservatives have been chasing the goal of overturning Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court’s 1973 decision legalizing abortion, while liberals have been warning it could be as few as one Republican-appointed justice away from disappearing. © Provided by Washington Examiner Monday’s news that the justices, now split 6-3 in favor of nominees picked by Republican presidents, will hear a challenge to the Roe precedent in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

Overturn Roe is an initiative of the Pro-Life Action League, in collaboration with Citizens for a Pro-Life Society and Created Equal. ©2021 Overturn Roe .

Roe fanned into life an issue that has inflamed our national politics in general, and has obscured with its smoke the selection of Justices to this Court in particular, ever since. . . . Value judgments, after all, should be voted on, not dictated; and if our Constitution has somehow accidentally committed them to the Supreme Court, at least we can have a sort of plebiscite each time a new nominee to that body is put forward.”

Roe has not settled the issue or removed it from our politics; quite the contrary. As Justice Antonin Scalia once wrote, “to portray Roe as the statesmanlike ‘settlement’ of a divisive issue, a jurisprudential Peace of Westphalia that is worth preserving, is nothing less than Orwellian. Roe fanned into life an issue that has inflamed our national politics in general, and has obscured with its smoke the selection of Justices to this Court in particular, ever since. . . . Value judgments, after all, should be voted on, not dictated; and if our Constitution has somehow accidentally committed them to the Supreme Court, at least we can have a sort of plebiscite each time a new nominee to that body is put forward.” Nothing in the three decades since he wrote those words has lessened their power.

There is a time and place for the courts to move gradually, letting the law develop one case at a time. But there is nothing new under the sun in arguments about the constitutional pedigree of Roe v. Wade. A majority of the Court knows that Roe is nonsense. It is past time for the justices to say so. Sixty-two million Americans have died. How many more need to die before the judiciary exercises its one, indispensable role: to say what the Constitution is?

This Case Will Mark the Beginning of the End for Roe v. Wade

  This Case Will Mark the Beginning of the End for Roe v. Wade It’s the perfect case to take away abortion rights—and the Supreme Court will hear it in October. Arising out of a Mississippi law designed specifically to challenge Roe v. Wade, the case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, is perfect because it gives the Court’s conservative supermajority a way to eviscerate abortion rights while still, if it wants to, sort of somehow upholding Roe as a precedent—as all the justices swore they would do during their confirmation hearings. That’s because the law doesn’t ban all abortions outright: It just moves the goalposts.

Overturn Roe is an initiative of the Pro-Life Action League, in collaboration with Citizens for a Pro-Life Society and Created Equal. ©2021 Overturn Roe .

Overturn Roe is an initiative of the Pro-Life Action League, in collaboration with Citizens for a Pro-Life Society and Created Equal. ©2021 Overturn Roe .

More on National Review

  • Today at the Supreme Court: Home Searches and Retroactive Rules
  • The Stakes of the Supreme Court’s New Abortion Case
  • The Supreme Court Cases to Watch as This Term Ends

Imagining a Post-Roe America .
The Supreme Court now has an opportunity to gut its 1973 abortion ruling. A savage landscape of inequality and culture war awaits.For those who favor greater reproductive rights, the Supreme Court’s decision to reconsider long-established precedent is deeply ominous. There won’t be a ruling until spring or summer of 2022, and it’s impossible to guess exactly what the new conservative majority might support. The Court could surprise us, as it did with the 1992 decision Planned Parenthood v.

usr: 0
This is interesting!