So it goes.
Nearly 50 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court in a landmark decision ruled that the U.S. Constitution generally protects a pregnant woman’s right to choose to have an abortion. This decision was overturned by the High Court on Friday morning.
“The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; RoeAnd Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives,” wrote Justice Samuel A. Alito, author of the majority opinion. It’s there. Finally.
While I listened, watched and wrote multiple reports, opinions and observations on the matter, RoeOverturning, I found my thoughts drifting back to Chief Justice Antonin Scalia who was one of the most brilliant legal minds of all time. What might he be thinking? While Alito was more than competent to write the majority opinion, I’m sure “Nino” would have done the honors, were he still with us, and what a brilliant job he would have done.
Whatever the case, Justice Scalia smiles today, regardless of how it turns out. That said, I took a look back at some of Scalia’s positions on abortion — and in particular, Roe V. Wade.
When asked about abortion during an interview with Lesley Stahl on CBS’ “60 Minutes” in 2008, Scalia admitted he was a “social conservative” but said it “does not affect [his] views on cases.”
On the abortion thing, for example, if indeed I were … trying to impose my own views, I would not only be opposed to Roe v. Wade, I would be in favor of the opposite view, which the antiabortion people would like to see adopted, which is to interpret the Constitution to mean that a state must prohibit abortion.
When Stahl asked, “And you’re against that?” Scalia replied, “Of course,” adding that there is “nothing” in the Constitution to support the interpretation.
Scalia added that allowing the Supreme Court the power to interpret the country’s “standards of decency” is “genuinely anti-democratic,” noted the Baltimore Sun, at the time.
Again, it’s there. It is now up to the SCOTUS, after Congress and the president go over their respective constitution skis to correct the ship. To bring the Constitution of America back in line.
Yet, today’s Democrat Party — Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer comes to mind — threatens SCOTUS Justices from the steps of the Supreme Court, and is headed by a pro-abortion president who still refuses to comment on a left-wing crackpot’s attempt to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh at his home.
The case of Casey v. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania — also overturned on Friday morning — the 1992 Supreme Court decision upholding Roe V. Wade, the justices in the majority believed they could “settle once and for all” the dispute over abortion.
Untrue, obviously, given today’s announced decision. As is the case with “settled” or “codified” law, all law, one could argue, is settled — until it is not. It is the overturning of RoeIt was a win for both the U.S. Constitution and the right of state governments to decide on abortion relative to their constituent states.
Scalia in ’92 said, in dissent of Casey, that an abortion right was not in the Constitution and thus was not a “protected” liberty — a dissent that became a majority opinion 30 years later.
He was an excellent writer and speaker. Below are some of the most important comments he made.
His dissent in Stenberg v. Carhart, 2000:
I am optimistic enough to believe that, one day, Stenberg v. Carhart will be assigned its rightful place in the history of this Court’s jurisprudence beside Korematsu and Dred Scott. The method of killing a human child — one cannot even accurately say an entirely unborn human child — proscribed by this statute is so horrible that the most clinical description of it evokes a shudder of revulsion.
“One cannot even accurately say an entirely unborn human child.” “Shudder revulsion,” indeed.
Scalia was also quoted in the above disagreement:
It’s a subjective value judgement that depends on one’s respect for the unborn fetus and the freedom granted to it by the woman who delivered it.
Wrong, Nino. As “deeply devout Catholic” Joe Biden says on-demand abortion (“killing it”) is an “essential health care service.”
Scalia’s speech at the University of Richmond in 2010:
“But some of the liberties the Supreme Court has found to be protected by that word— liberty — nobody thought constituted a liberty when the 14th Amendment was adopted. Abortion? It was criminal in all the states.”
Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Nancy Pelosi, and all other revisionists of American history — solely for their own politically expedient reasons — were unavailable for comment.
Finally, here’s how Scalia best summed up Roe V. Wade:
Roe’s mandate for abortion on demand destroyed the compromises of the past, rendered compromise impossible for the future, and required the entire issue to be resolved uniformly, at the national level.
Roe also established a new category of consumers and proponents for abortion, removing any moral objections that were attached to the act.
Amen. Scalia smiles again 30 years later.
RedState Related:
Joe Biden’s Response to the Supreme Court Overturning Roe Is Just as Weird and Deranged as Any Biden Speech Ever
Melodramatic Pelosi Condemns Roe Overturn: ‘Ripping Away Women’s Right’ to Kill Unborn Children
Sedition is now acceptable, after Roe has been overturned
About Post Author
