The claim of malpractice and fraud is not sustainable at this date, especially because McCorvey actually won her case.
She had to wait until someone like Allan Parker and the Justice Foundation, as well as Operation Outcry and Silent No More could step up to help her.
Here's the problem: it's 32 years after the fact. No amount of arm-waving is going to change that.
Also, there is new legal standing, with some other case overturned in the last few years, opening the way to this filing.
There isn't standing for a Rule 60(b) motion at this late a date, especially by the prevailing party.
Would you have let Justice Taney's ruling concerning Dred Scot stand because of "established law" and "relevence"?
You're the second person to raise the question. That case was rendered moot by the 13th Amendment.
Human beings, our children, are killed by abortion - nearly 4000 a day, 40 to 45 million in 32 years.
Fine. Do something effective about it. This isn't an effective maneuver.
You do point out some of the problems with judicial highhandedness and legislation from the bench. Most of us are not lawyers and don't even know where to look for the booby traps.
The Court ignored precedent and factual science in favor of what ifs and amphibian embryology. Most horribly, they distorted the 14th Amendment and ignored that our Nation protects the right to life of non-citizens.
Texas has not repealed our abortion laws, we have made accomodations forced by R v. W.
Norma McCovey has herself been harmed by the fraud of Weddington and her co-horts.
As to timeliness - one of the cases used as an example was overturned after over 40 years (NAACP vs. Duval County School).