There is nothing in the Constitution as it is written to prove that there is a basic American right to kill an unborn child. With this ruling, the Supreme Court has gracefully removed itself from the abortion debate. As it should. For me, the respect that I have for this historic decision is not based on my opinions on the abortion issue. Rather, the value for me lies in the Supreme Court reverting back to its intended role.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022). History! Make no mistake about it, true American Conservatism is on its deathbed and the end is nigh, but this decision shows that unbridled radical progressivism will not be able to run roughshod over the nation’s Founding Principles without a final valiant struggle. Indeed, there is still a chance for a miracle.
In a thunderous 6-3 decision heard round the world, the Supreme Court finally overturned Roe v. Wade (1973). Justices Alito and Thomas led the charge, showcasing their once-in-a-generation brilliance via their razor sharp Case Opinions. Additionally, Donald Trump appointees Gorsuch, Barrett, and Kavanaugh finally stepped up to the plate in crunch time, etching their own special place in American legal lore by honoring one of the greatest documents in human history. Thanks to Dobbs, the Supreme Court has appropriately removed itself from the abortion discussion so that the divisive issue can be ruled upon by the individual states rather than by the federal government. This remarkable decision by the highest Court in the land honors state’s rights and federalism, which is consistent with the spirit of the Constitution and is in line with the original philosophy of the United States.
Let me be crystal clear about this. Roe v. Wade was a shambolic ruling from its inception. Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe), the pregnant woman who was the subject of the 1973 Court case initially lied about being raped so that she could obtain an abortion and push a political agenda. McCorvey later repented for her dishonesty and adopted a vehemently pro-life stance in the latter half of her life. But besides that obvious red flag, Roe was never legally sound to begin with. It was based on the fuzzy concept of substantive due process protections in the 14th Amendment that safeguard the unenumerated “fundamental rights” that all people have. In Roe, the “fundamental right” at question was the ambiguous right to privacy (which can mean a number of things) which was then extended further to mean a fundamental privacy right to abortion.
Left-leaning Justice Harry Blackmun and the other concurring Justices in the 1973 decision basically created an implied right embedded within an implied right. Such skillful gymnastics can only be mockingly compared to the Russian Matryoshka Nesting Dolls, which are famous for having increasingly smaller dolls within the original doll. The preposterous bending and re-interpretation of the 9th and 14th Amendments of the Constitution to fit a liberal political narrative was the fatal error of Roe v. Wade decision. There is no explicit “right to privacy” in the Constitution. And there is obviously no right to abortion. The Supreme Court can only make decisions based on what rights are clearly stated in the Constitution and that is why it had no place in inserting itself into the abortion debate in the first place.
Fundamental rights do exist but the Founders did not explicitly say what every single one of our rights are, and they did that on purpose. They left those “unenumerated” rights up to interpretation because they understood that those rights had to be determined based on cultural norms rather than by their own limited judgments. To that effect, it makes far more sense that the legality of contentious cultural issues such as abortion be left to state legislatures and elected officials who can better represent the cultural values of their regions. In his brilliant dissent to Roe v. Wade ruling, Justice Byron White expressed his disapproval in the following: “The Court simply fashion[ed] and announce[d] a new constitutional right for pregnant women and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invest[ed] that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes.”
The acrobatics that the Supreme Court displayed to pull off Roe v. Wade had never been seen before in United States History with the possible exception of Brown v. Board of Education (1954) which itself was far more of a political and cultural ruling than a legal one. Long story short, the proper move by the Supreme Court back in 1973 would have been to declare that it had no standing to rule on the issue. Which it did not. There is nothing tangible in the Constitution as it is written to prove that there is a basic American right to kill an unborn child. To that effect, the 1973 ruling was nothing more than an affirmation of the massive left-wing cultural revolution that took place during the 1960s and early 1970s and the progressive leanings of some of the Justices of that era.
June 24, 2022 will go down as a historically great day in America’s legal history. While it is true that acknowledging stare decisis (precedent) is crucial to maintaining the stability of the country's legal system, bad decisions must be overturned or re-evaluated. When the Supreme Court makes a ruling that is based on politics rather than on the letter of the law, then that ruling should not dictate all subsequent rulings in similar cases. A politically biased Supreme Court decision simply cannot properly serve as a precedent. Justices Alito, Thomas, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Roberts made the right call to overturn one of the worst legal decisions in our nation’s history.
Comments