Nearly a year ago, the U.S. Supreme Court made a truly landmark decision when it found the Constitution of the United States does not confer a right to abortion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case.
While many had warned about it, the speed at which the ability for a woman to choose her own medical care being taken away has been breathtaking as we look back. Abortions are now banned in 14 states. Five other states have partial bans, from as early as six weeks. Eight states have tried to ban abortions but were defeated. There have even been attempts to make it a crime to leave one state to get an abortion in another state.
In Congress, House Republicans only recently abandoned a years-long push by their party to pass a federal abortion ban.
Twenty seven states and the District of Columbia, a group that New Jersey is included in, have maintained and have offered new protections for abortion since last June.
But those opposed to abortion have not stopped at banning abortion in their attempts to control women and their reproductive choices—they want to make birth control pills illegal as well.
In the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v FDA case emanating from Texas, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk imposed a nationwide ban on mifepristone as the former anti-abortion activist declared that the FDA had improperly approved the drug 23 years ago. The U.S. Supreme Court stayed an immediate ban despite dissenting opinions from Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito that make it clear in Alito case he believes the ban has merit; oral arguments in lower courts are set for May 17. The case is expected to reach the Supreme Court in the next term.
Between Republicans lawmakers and conservative judges working in tandem, politicians have rolled back 50 years of a woman’s right to choose.
Abortion is one of those cases in America where politics, gender, race, religion, health, and morality are all mixed up in a cauldron that makes for explosive dividing lines. It is probably the longest running culture war conflict in the U.S. today.
The Supreme Court in 1972 found in Roe v Wade gave women the ability to to decide whether to continue a pregnancy as a liberty guaranteed in the Constitution, which protects personal privacy. In Dobbs, the court overruled both Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in returning the issue to individual states that gave them power to regulate any aspect of abortion.
We disagreed with the court on this ruling when it first came down and our worst fears have proven to be true: the rights of women are being rolled back from the same court that expanded those of gun owners. It is an inconsistency that we find maddening.
In our view, abortion is a question of rights—the ability to obtain a medical procedure without governmental interference should be unalienable. We have no arguments with those who say it is taking a life because it is. To believe that those making that choice do so without weighing all of the options is not being fair.
But it is a choice that should be made by a woman and her doctor (and yes, we hope the father as well). And any laws that attempt to interfere with that should be fought.
You clearly don’t understand the Constitution. Which article of the Constitution establishes a Constitutional right to an abortion? You need to be able to answer that question clearly before complaining that the Supreme Court took away a right.
The reality is that the Supreme Court in Roe v Wade discovered that abortion is somehow contained within a “right of privacy” but that right actually doesn’t exist in the literal words of the Constitution: the “right to privacy” is shorthand for the Fifth Amendment’s right against unreasonable searches and seizures and the security of personal property. It is a big stretch to fold abortion into the Fifth Amendment.
Dobbs reversed Roe because there is a much clearer explicit provision in the Constitution that overrides implied rights: the 10th Amendment clearly states that powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the States or the people. States have historically decided what constitutes the crime of murder.
As you point out, abortion is the taking of a life. Whether that taking is murder or some other crime is a matter for each State to decide and that is correct not only because of the 10th Amendment but because abortion is very complex local issue that is best decided by each State rather than having a federal law that will be strongly resisted by many regions.
Your own article makes clear that the State-by-State solution is working as the Court predicted. Some StTrs are making abortion easy, others are making it difficult or even legally impossible.
What is wrong with a democratic solution to an issue that can’t be resolved at the national level?
Abortion is the taking of human life. All the words in support of aborttion does not change that fact. It is not a medical procedure because being pregnant is not an illness
Abortion is the taking of human life of the most vulnerable. Word don’t change that fact.
And the 2nd amendment does not give you, as an individual a right to own a fire arm.
Rather, it allows the states to form a militia (aka “draft”) and force you to buy your own firearm. The federal government at the time was very poor and could not afford a big enough army. So, they left the states provide an army for them. (The cost of a firearm in 1776 was roughly the cost of an auto today)
So, any talk of what the constitution reads or don’t read is hogwash. 9 people in black robes do not decide for me. Or the women I know.
Mr. Atkinson…is correct.
The bottom line is that the Supreme Court has corrected the glitch. If people, in a state, deem abortion is a safe and reliable form of ending a pregnancy…then people must vote for a state representative, who will support the women’s right to choose.
Is it a political PULSE ISSUE, I believe so. I believe the Republicans are creating a HUGE backlash with this issue. HOWEVER, Democrats are pushing the envelope…in regards of too much freedom…to choose.
Everyone knows that there is a common sense solution. BUT votes, misinformation, etc. MATTER, first.
The devastating consequences…to not have an abortion…including for the society…are too numerous to list. Still, the wrecklessness of certain timelines, for an abortion, (and I’m not against late term abortions…for serious reasons) have crossed the line…as well. Unfortunately, both extremes have taken center stage.
For any politician to dictate rape, incest and life threatening situations are not reasons for a late term abortion…I say vote them out. For any politician to say…well she changed her mind, in the 6th month of pregnancy (this stuff happens)… I say vote them out. Responsibility does matter.
I expect that both sides will come to some sort reality check. And the Supreme Court will stand it’s ground…that the states determine this issue. Vote out your state representatives…that think it’s THEIR RIGHT TO PLAY POLITICS. And hound candidates about this issue…it’s important.
If we really want woman’s and the people of America’s rights to be secure, only one thing needs to be done. Remove the religious conversion of our constitution to Sharia ” Christian” laws. One thing, Remove every Republican from power. Not rocket science here.
Abortion is the taking of innocent human life. All the words used for abortion won’t change that. Please stop censoring my emails
No matter what you believe about abortion, you should be angered by Judge Kacsmaryk’s decision in the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine case. Judge Kacsmaryk, although a judge with jurisdiction over only one part of Texas, made a decision affecting the entire United States. The case was brought by an organization that should not have been allowed to bring the suit, because it does not satisfy the federal rules about who can bring a suit. Federal judges do not have the power to order the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to remove a drug from the market. In fact, it is very unusual for the FDA to remove a drug–even one that has been found to be dangerous.
The drug involved in this case, mifepristone, is used for medication abortions to end an early pregnancy. The plaintiffs in this case are doctors, who said that they faced harm if they had to provide care for women who are harmed by mifepristone. But in fact, mifepristone was approved by the FDA more than 20 years ago. Emergency rooms have not been overwhelmed with patients harmed by a dangerous drug: mifepristone is much safer than many other drugs. The decision is based on ignorance of medicine as well as disregard of the law.
Right now, this complicated case is working its way through the legal system. The Supreme Court has delayed enforcement of Kacsmaryk’s decision, but eventually the Supreme Court might uphold it. Unless the Supreme Court makes it very clear that district court judges must obey the law and stay within their powers, everyone is in danger. Another judge might decide to ban drugs used to treat alcoholism or drug addiction, because he thinks that addicts and alcoholics are bad people. Or, a judge who has a religious objection to divorce might say that state divorce laws are invalid. They don’t have the legal power to do this–but neither did Judge Kacsmaryk have the right to do what he did.
The FDA must be allowed to carry out its role of regulating prescription drugs. That’s its job; it’s not up to federal judges. The state of Texas has imposed strict restrictions on abortions in Texas. I wish they hadn’t done this, but the legislature had the right to do so. I’m glad that New Jersey upholds the legality of abortion. The Texas state legislature doesn’t have the power to tell New Jersey to forbid abortion. We need to remain a country where the rule of law can be relied on.