By Tony Farkas
John Roberts and the Supremes are going to overturn Roe v. Wade, and the lesser-known Planned Parenthood v. Casey, according to a draft opinion leaked last week from the U.S. Supreme Court.
In and of itself, the leak is a pretty egregious flouting of federal law, and should be investigated and prosecuted, surely.
More important, though, is that it reverses long-held involvement of the federal government and, if the writing holds, kicks the matters to the states.
In perusing just about every news site and social media site, you would get the sense that women have been relegated back into the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant, and will have to birth children, wanted or not, like a Pez dispenser.
“The Handmaid’s Tale” dresses are out everywhere, and the Supreme Court has taken the extreme measure of erecting fences around the court to ensure “insurrections” or some other shenanigans are kept at bay.
As I mentioned last week, I think it has begun — there a literal reading of the laws of the land going. Rulings such as this show that there are limits to the power the federal government has, and that it’s up to us and the checks and balances built into our system of government to enforce those limits.
Despite the doomsaying, the court did not ban abortions, and no reading of the decision will change that fact. That hasn’t stopped the squadrons of people claiming the sky is falling.
What the ruling does, however, is place the matter in the hands of the individual states as was intended and codified into the U.S. Constitution. It will be up to governors and their respective legislative bodies — elected by their constituents — to determine what happens next.
The people who are decrying this development would have you believe that a legal term I learned from my father — but for — will lead states to ban all abortions, returning the entire country to the bad old days of back-alley D&Cs or to medical trips abroad (but for the actions of the Supreme Court, these protections would not be lost). They would also have you believe that yet again, stodgy old white dudes have made decisions that affect women’s bodies.
Aside from the fact that the court has people of color, as well as three women, the court is not responsible to bend the laws to fit the needs of whomever, but to determine if the laws dovetail with the Constitution as written. It’s long been held, since the 70s when Roe was decided, that the justices hearing the case created the right out of thin air — the trimester framework.
Interestingly enough, the original Roe v. Wade decision was published — leaked — before being released by the court.
The arguments surrounding all of this seem to be oxymoronic to other stances, and even to itself, which makes it puzzling. I saw several astute things, each worth the exploration of thought. (I say thought, because accepting what is said at face value, especially on the internet.)
If it’s not a human being, then why can it be harvested for organs or DNA?
No one should have the right to tell you what to do with your body, no question. But seriously, it’s not just one body anymore. It’s two.
It’s come up countless times regarding free speech is that, yes, you have the right to free speech. You also have the right to face those consequences. That same logic should apply here, since ultimately, pregnancy isn’t accidental, nor cosmic, nor an illness, but a condition born out of decision. It could have just as easily been decided to not take the chance of creating a baby.
If “my body, my choice” is being honest, then it seems to me that the government being pushed out of the abortion argument is a step in the right direction.
At least, a step away from government.