She is talking too much, she should go to MSNBC or CNN, join their religion of death and leave us alone.
Abortion is a disorder.
She doesn’t speak for conservatives.
One does not have to be a Christian to believe abortion is murder and is therefore wrong. Nat Hentoff was a prime example of such.
Dearest tomi: Bless your little heart. You are such a brainless nitwit and indefatigable twit.
She needs to get a man and start doing some housework.
What's a Tomi Lahren?
Another closet Constitutional expert?
My copies of the Constitution, which I read regularly, has failed to reveal any reference whatsoever to infanticide. Any help about that from Lahren would be useful. How do ignorant unknown blonde bimbo loudmouths get so much attention?
Gee, where is it in the constitution to kill children??
She is right. This is not to be decided by the Court. Besides, abortion is not in the Constitution. It is not a “right”.
However, States’ rights and equal protection of the law are in the Constitution.
Roe v Wade only broadly decriminalized abortion. I have no problem with that under current (insufficient) definitions and those who take the other extreme are beating a dead horse in promoting a neverending political conflict and, as Tomi states, spit on the Constitution.
Also in the Constitution is all the guidelines for Congress to make law. A decision of ‘injustice’ by SCOTUS is moot when Congress resolves the injustice by making law. SCOTUS has said as much. “Abortion” is much too broad. There needs to be federal legislation to eliminate the uncertainties on which SCOTUS found with their decision in RvW.
Certain types of abortions SHOULD be illegal and a much broader national debate must occur to resolve this conflict. States should be left to decide on the basis of their own citizenry within guidelines established by Congress. As a species, humans treat animals better than our babies; the statistics are indisputable.
Pro-life vs. “abortion” is a non-starter. It’s only more power to those in power and perpetual conflict for the rest of us. A dialogue is in order, not at SCOTUS, but on a national level in Congress, but the cowards there will choose political conflict over dialogue if that is what their constituents demand, a continuous feedback loop reinforcing the definition of insanity.
Reversing the “teaching kids in grade school that sex is a recreational activity for which there are no consequences” is a great place to start undoing the damage, but it will take a generation.
.02
She’s right about the stupidity of going after Roe, but not because its unconstitutional to do so.
It’s overreach, and it isn’t even a good goal.
The goal is to reduce abortions to zero. Convincing people that its the worst choice possible so that they never ELECT to have an abortion is the right way to go about that goal.
If she didn’t look the way she did, she wouldn’t have a program. I doubts she even understands Roe, its legal implications, etc. That Roe shredded states rights here and violated the 10th amendment is the legal point. Each state should have been able to make their own decisions on the matter.
Since when is Abortion a Religious Issue?
That’s like say Murder is a Religious Issue.
Roe was an abomination to the judiciary. It's the ultimate example of judges usurping power from the people.
She’s not wrong. Either we oppose ideological requirements for judicial appointments, or we do not. The correct path is never the easy path.
Lahren is like most people when it comes to the various hot button issues, all emotion and no logic or common sense.
Roe for all it was and is, is basically a flawed decision from the court going back to Wickard v Filburn in 1942, that held that a farmer who grew a crop for his own internal consumption — that of his family and his animals on said farm, never entering one grain of same into commerce, was nonetheless subject to federal regulation on how much of said crop he could grow or whether he could grow it at all.
The claim was that because his act of growing same would mean he wouldn’t need to buy as much, or none at all, of the same product or something that provided the same benefit (e.g. was food and thus sustained life) that affected interstate commerce.
There are certainly other examples even the 17th amendment that allowed for Direct Election of Senators was a case the court the should have held unconstitutional.
Lahren needs to get a grip and research a little more into how the Constitution really works. Roe, if overturned, would just put the issue where it needs to go, back to the states and let it get sorted it out there.
Oh, Tomi, Roe v. Wade WAS judicial activism. It wasn’t enough for them to strike down the law in question, but then the court imposed a three-trimester system as to what level restrictions would be permissible in which trimester. This sounds like kritarchy (rule by judges) to me.
Harry Blackmun and 6 other justices spat on the Constitution with the Roe vs Wade decision. Here is why.
There is no wording in the Constitution or in the Bill of Rights having to do with abortion. (See Amendment 10 below). At the time when Roe vs. Wade was enacted, 48 States had restrictions on abortion. One State had partial restrictions and one State had free access to abortion.
10th AMENDMENT
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
11TH AMENDMENT
The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
This is indicative of her generation, and the effect of academia and media.
Fox Nation is coming soon: your favorite personalities, outspoken opinions, exclusive shows and no-holds-barred conversation. Click here to sign up and stay informed! https://t.co/TqvTLY2hRN pic.twitter.com/pf0nDqm3ht— Fox Nation (@foxnation) July 9, 2018
Tomi Lahren is an idiot.
The Roe and Casey decisions went against the Constituion.
Overturning them is respecting the Constitution.