Posted on 01/17/2005 12:53:02 PM PST by davidosborne
C E N T E R F O R R E C L A I M I N G A M E R I C A From the Desk of Dr. Gary Cass, Executive Director + + PRO-LIFE ALERT,
1/17/2005 Supreme Court receives case to overturn Roe v. Wade (Forward to your pro-life friends)
On January 18, the U.S. Supreme Court will begin a process that could overturn Roe v. Wade! Because you have stood with the Center for Reclaiming America on pro-life issues, I wanted to alert you to this news. On January 18, Norma McCorvey (the original "Jane Roe" of Roe v. Wade) will file a legal appeal with the Supreme Court to have Roe v. Wade reversed. I will be in Washington, D.C., on that day to stand with our friends at The Justice Foundation in support of this case. The Justice Foundation has invested thousands upon thousands of hours in this case. They have gathered an enormous body of evidence to support Norma's case. Chris, this is a powerful opportunity to refute Roe v. Wade! Here is how you can help. First, notify your friends. Forward this message to everyone you know. We simply must get the word out. Second, please pray for Norma and the team at The Justice Foundation. Set aside time on January 18, specifically, to pray. Third, find out more about this case and how you can impact The Justice Foundation’s efforts here: http://www.operationoutcry.org Thank you! Dr. Gary Cass Executive Director Center for Reclaiming America + + For CENTER coverage of this issue: http://www.reclaimamerica.org/pages/operation/operationout.asp + + The Center for Reclaiming America, established by Dr. D. James Kennedy, is an outreach of Coral Ridge Ministries to inform the American public and motivate Christians to defend and implement the biblical principles on which our country was founded. The Center, led by Executive Director Dr. Gary Cass, provides non-partisan, non-denominational information, training, and support to all those interested in impacting the culture and renewing the vision set forth by our Founding Fathers. Questions? cfra@coralridge.org
Oh, goody. Read that first clause very carefully, and you'll see why you should be worried.
Question: Has the USSC ever reversed itself?
What are the odds of getting 2/3 of all Senators to remove a liberal judge absent treason or moral turpitude?
I pray along with most everybody here for an end to death by abortion, and am only somewhat aware of "the way the law really works". I understand the concept of granting certiorari and that it is unlikely that it will happen in this case. Also the concept of stare decisis which makes all lower courts follow higher court rulings and puts pressure for continuity. But what is not clear is what one person alluded to as the Catch-22 situation, i.e. how can it be possible in a free society for the opinion of an overwhelming majority of citizens in a specific area to count for nothing.
For example, there are several mostly smaller states such as West Virginia and South Dakota where the vast majority of legislators and the governor are pro-life! Yet what would happen if the state passed a law declaring that the executive branch of the state government is empowered to prevent all abortions (excluding say life of the mother etc) within state boundaries? Here in WV we have 31 of 34 state senators being pro-life as well as 80 of 100 state house members. Some other state are similar.
In fact last year the SD state house passed such a bill and it almost passed the state senate to be signed by the pro-life governor. The ONLY reason is didn't is that several pro-life senators understood that rather than enforcing a ban on abortions, the law would be immediately declared unconstitutional and upon appeal probably end up being taken up on certiorari by the US Supreme Court as a basis to RE-AFFIRM Roe v. Wade 6-3. Nothing would happen except for more pro-abortion propaganda by our left-wing press. So in fact it is absolutely essential to focus on getting either a pro-life majority on the USSC (which may be impossible since several have seemed conservative until they got on), or a Constitutional amendment (which fortunately overrules the USSC since they can't declare the Constitution un-Constitutional), or a bill through Congress declaring that the federal courts have no jurisdiction on such matters.
Many brilliant legal minds have thought long and hard about the problem at hand, and the current appeal for certiorari on the basis reported is their best shot, I would not call a press conference about it.
If this case can be reopened 32 years later, it can be reopened again...and again...and again...and again...
At some point, a fork needs to be stuck in it, and it needs to be done and over with.
That's because nothing good for conservatives is going to happen with this at the SupCt level.
There is no statute of limitations for murder.
This isn't a murder case.
Yes.
Plessy v. Ferguson established the doctrine of "separate but equal" accomodations based on skin color.
Brown v. Board of Education threw out that doctrine.
Note that the case that threw it out was Brown v. Board of Education, and not Plessy v. Ferguson Mulligan. The Court needed a new case and a new cause of action to overturn Plessy.
There will be a Brown v. Board of Education for abortion. It will not be a Mulligan on Roe v. Wade--that case is closed and over with.
I like the legislation, but why doesn't he go one step farther and prohibit them from adjudicating claims based on state law and the supremacy clause, unless they are reviewing federal law that applies to the states? That would remove a good chunk of the problems they've created.
Bump to that. And imagine the 'defense.' Who knows what Greg Abbott would do right now, given his statement that regardless of his views on abortion, he would as AG mount a defense of abortion rights if they were state law, and his backtracking on abortion restrictions?!?!
Perjury in Texas has a three-year statute of limitations, so they won't be able to prosecute McCorvey on that basis, thank goodness.
The supreme court should have overturned the decision as soon as Roe recanted her testimony, and then hauled her back to court on a perjury charge. That didn't happen so Roe is attempting to get their attention through other legal means. Hope she is successful. Put the abortion question back in the box it came from, and stop listening to the anguished cries from fems about butcher doctors, coat hangers, and death by abortion. According to some statistics, the suicide rate for those who have had an abortion, far exceeds the death rate caused by bad doctoring. Statistics aren't everything, but the total abortion numbers per year ought to be worth something in a statistical world.
"They can and have heard other cases long after the original rulings."
Name one that is similar to this. Much more likely you are referring to their overturning of prior cases. Not the same thing at all.
OUT OF GENUINE CUROSITY, why do moderators on this forum have to be such egotistical buttholes?!?
Many would argue this is the ULTIMATE "murder" case
I don't like the precedent this could set. Why not revisit Brown v School Board or even Marbury v Madison?
Do you know anyone who thinks the cases you mentioned should be revisited?
Her request rests on federal rules that allow an original party to request a ruling be vacated when factual and legal changes make the decision no longer just.McCorvey claims to have the testimony of over 1,000 women who claim to have been hurt by abortion, saying that the emotional, physical, and psychological effects of their abortions were devastating to them.
McCorvey said that if there had been the technology that we have now, such as sonograms, she believes that the Roe decision might have been differently decided. She also cited the increased knowledge of the damaging effects abortion has on women's physical and mental health. McCorvey noted new technology that dramatically increases the viablility of the unborn child. New laws that allow "safe haven" for women to leave their babies relieve them of the obligation of raising a child they cannot raise, McCorvey's motion notes.
The danger is that the court does revisit the case and actually toughens the Roe V Wade arguement and decision!
Roe v Wade will never be overturned.
Accept it.
If you believe the court was in error, how do you suggest it be corrected?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.