Perspectives on the Dodd Decision Overruling Roe v. Wade

American Thinker ^ | June 26, 2022 | Clarice Feldman

[upchuck]

There has been much perfervid shouting and rending of garments (or these days, parading about with red splotches on the crotches of their clothing or performative displays in Handmaid's Tale costumes -- red hooded capes) to protest the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. On the other hand, those opposed to abortion hail this decision, claiming abortions will end or be much reduced.

Neither side is right. I believe the decision will not substantially lessen the number of abortions. On the other hand, I do think that it signals a significant retreat from the days when the Supreme Court creatively crafted imaginary rights to strip the states of their constitutional role. Federalism is back.

I also believe the attorney general’s response to the rioting and threats by Roe proponents and to the Bruen decision on gun ownership reveals him as a man insufficiently respectful of the Supreme Court and unwilling to perform his sworn duty to impartially enforce the law. He deserves to be impeached.

[Vigilanteman]

Yep. And as pointed out by others, the Mississippi law they were challenging here is LESS restrictive of abortion than the law in France.

For over 49 years since Roe v. Wade they COULD HAVE had first trimester abortions without restriction, but they weren't happy with that.

They had to expand the evil practice up until the moment of birth and even beyond. They had to push to drive health care workers out of their profession if they refused to participate. They had to show the whole public just how rotten, evil and unwilling to compromise that they were.

And now, the worm has turned.