|
comments,
ephemera, speculation, etc.
(protected political
speech and personal opinion)
2022-
2022-05-03 c
ROE ABORTED III
10 key passages from
Alito’s draft opinion, which would overturn Roe v.
Wade
The wording of the
court’s ultimate ruling and the line-up of justices
who support it could change. Here are 10 important
passages in the draft opinion.
Justice
Samuel Alito’s draft opinion, which would overturn Roe v. Wade, wages a frontal assault
on the reasoning of the landmark 1973 opinion that
found a federal constitutional right to abortion.
Alito’s
draft is labeled as a proposed majority opinion, though the wording of
the court’s ultimate ruling and the line-up of
justices who support it could change before final
release, expected by late June or early July.
- “We hold that Roe and Casey must
be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to
abortion, and no such right is implicitly
protected by any constitutional provision....”
- “Roe was egregiously
wrong from the start. Its reasoning was
exceptionally weak, and the decision has had
damaging consequences. And far from bringing about
a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate
and deepened division. It is time to heed the
Constitution and return the issue of abortion to
the people’s elected representatives.”
- “In the years
prior to [Roe
v. Wade], about a third of the States had
liberalized their laws, but Roe abruptly ended
that political process. It imposed the same
highly restrictive regime on the entire Nation,
and it effectively struck down the abortion laws
of every single State. … [I]t represented the
‘exercise of raw judicial power’… and it sparked a
national controversy that has embittered our
political culture for a half-century.”
- “The
inescapable conclusion is that a right to
abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s
history and traditions. On the contrary, an
unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain
of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest
days of the common law until 1973.”
- “In some States,
voters
may believe that the abortion right should be more
even more [sic] extensive than the right Casey and Roe recognized. Voters in
other States may wish to impose tight restrictions
based on their belief that abortion destroys an
‘unborn human being.’ ... Our nation’s historical
understanding of ordered liberty does not prevent
the people’s elected representatives from deciding
how abortion should be regulated.”
- “We have long
recognized, however, that stare decisis is ‘not
an inexorable command,’ and it ‘is at its
weakest when we interpret the Constitution.’ It
has been said that it is sometimes more important
that an issue ‘be settled than that it be settled
right.’ But when it comes to the interpretation of
the Constitution — the ‘great charter of our
liberties,’ which was meant ‘to endure through a
long lapse of ages,’ we place a high value on
having the matter ‘settled right.’”
- “On many other
occasions, this Court has overruled
important constitutional decisions. … Without these
decisions, American constitutional law as we know
it would be unrecognizable, and this would be a
different country.”
- ”Casey described itself as
calling both sides of the national
controversy to resolve their debate, but in doing so,
Casey necessarily declared a
winning side. … The Court short-circuited the
democratic process by closing it to the large
number of Americans who dissented in any respect
from Roe. … Together, Roe and Casey represent an error
that cannot be allowed to stand.”
- “Roe certainly did not
succeed in ending division on the issue of
abortion. On the contrary, Roe ‘inflamed’ a national
issue that has remained bitterly divisive for the
past half-century....This Court’s inability to end
debate on the issue should not have been
surprising. This Court cannot bring about the
permanent resolution of a rancorous national
controversy simply by dictating a settlement and
telling the people to move on. Whatever influence
the Court may have on public attitudes must stem
from the strength of our opinions, not
an attempt to exercise ‘raw judicial power.’”
- “We do not
pretend to know how our political system or
society will respond to today’s decision
overruling Roe and Casey. And even if we could
foresee what will happen, we would have no
authority to let that knowledge influence our
decision. We can only do our job, which is to
interpret the law, apply longstanding principles
of stare
decisis, and decide this case accordingly. We
therefore hold that the Constitution does not
confer a right to abortion. Roe
and Casey must be overruled, and the authority to
regulate abortion must be returned to the people
and their elected representatives.”
– Citations to other
decisions and authorities have been omitted from
these excerpts. Italics are presented as they appear
in the draft opinion.
(read
more)
______________________
Permission is hereby granted to any and all to
copy and paste any entry on this page and
convey it electronically along with its URL,
______________________
|
...
News and facts for
those sick and tired of the National Propaganda Radio
version of reality.
- Unlike all the legacy media, our editorial offices are
not in Langley, Virginia.
- You won't catch
us fiddling while Western Civilization burns.
- Close the windows so you don't hear the
mockingbird outside, grab a beer, and see what the hell
is going on as we witness the controlled demolition of
our society.
- The truth
usually comes from one source. It comes quietly, with no
heralds. Untruths come from multiple sources, in unison,
and incessantly.
- The loudest
partisans belong to the smallest parties. The media
exaggerate their size and influence.
|