Abortion laws in the United States prior to Roe vs. Wade
Legal upon request
If Roe/Wade is overturned by the Supreme Court, abortions would become
illegal in every State. The States would have to pass abortion, or
anti-abortion laws individually, as it was before Roe/Wade.
The Federal government could make abortions illegal in every State in
the Union, if both Houses passed such bills and the Supreme Court voted
approval of those bills in an at least 5-4 majority.
It's very plausible the Supreme Court could overturn Roe/Wade.
I doubt both Houses of Congress would pass bills to make abortion
illegal throughout the country. They would not have the votes for that.
Another scenario would be if the Supreme Court had the correct worded
case to decide the Supreme Court could outlaw States from allowing
abortions, then the Congress would have to pass a law allowing States to
have abortions if they wanted.
But, be careful what you wish for. Roe/Wade was decided based on a right to privacy. Those against Roe/Wade claim there is no right to privacy in the Constitution that allowed Roe/Wade to become law. If Roe/Wade is to be overturned the Court will have to say there is and never was a right to privacy. That could eliminate privacy rights most Americans think they have. A right to privately worship as one deems necessary. A right to own a gun, and many other assumed rights based on the privacy of being an American.
For 200 years legal scholars never read the Second Amendment as giving individuals the right to own a gun. It was just a given in the tradition and practice of Americans. Then 200 years later the Court decided that American individuals did have a right to own guns. A simple reinterpretation by a different Court.
Roe/Wade has been the law of the land for over 40 years. Chief Justice Roberts called that a legal precedent, that he would not seek to overturn. But the Court is now a majority conservative Court with religious law as its main belief system. It seems we are headed to overturn Roe/Wade no matter how many millions of citizens suffer. People should remind themselves of that suffering, because it was a great persuader of passing Roe/Wade.
As I understand it, Jerry, a simple overturning or nullification of Roe v. Wade would simply allow each state to pass laws regarding abortion as they saw fit. California could pass a law that would allow abortions up until the baby was being born, like they currently have. Texas could outright ban all abortions. And all the other 48 states could do anything in between.
ReplyDeleteNext, I have a God-given and first amendment protected right to worship or not worship however I so choose. I am not aware of privacy having any bearing on this. If so, I'd be curious why you state this.
I have a second amendment right to keep and bear arms. Further, I respectfully disagree with your assertion that for 200 years legal scholars thought that individuals did not have the right to bear arms. There is a reason why this is the second amendment in the Bill of Rights for individual American citizens, sir. The Bill of Rights were specifically drafted to protect these individual rights. If this was purely for a government "militia" as many left of center people have stated, then this would have been placed in the body of the constitution under the government's responsibilities and rights. They would not put the federal government's rights and responsibilities under the Bill of Rights that were specifically drafted to protect individual liberties, sir.
Lastly, I know that you and I disagree with this, but shouldn't a just and moral government's first duty be to protect its people? And shouldn't that include the most helpless like our unborn children? I believe a woman has a right, like all people, to do as she wishes with her own body; however, that child growing within her is a separate life from her own with its own unique DNA and potential for goodness. That child is a separate life and not a part of her body, sir.
As the graph (prior to Roe/Wade) States did decide individually what their abortion laws would be. If Roe/Wade were overturned then it would revert back to that system unless the Congress passed some other federal law.
ReplyDeleteIt not just a matter that you and I disagree. It's a matter of personal rights. It amazes me that so many Americans are up in arms about a vaccine mandate (that only applies to government workers) citing a personal right to choose, yet, they cannot comprehend that women are asking for the same rights for their bodies.
The second Amendment specifically stated a "militia" not individuals. You are reading it wrong. If you search legal history you will not find any Supreme Court that found an individual right to own guns.
If we eliminate an individual right to privacy (the legal theory to allow Roe/Wade) then all sorts of rights disappear. If you don't have a right to privacy, then you have no protection to keep the government out of your house, or to search your person.
Your interpretation that an unborn is a human being is your thinking and not federal law. Roe/Wade specifically states times when abortion is legal and when it is not. The Courts own interpretation does not recognize an unborn is a human being until a certain gestation period. I understand you disagree with that, but it is the law.
God does not give rights in America. The Constitution and the courts do. We do not have a theocracy. A lesson you obviously have to learn.
Have you ever studied why Roe/Wade passed in the first place?
I wouldn't worry to much, we now have a Supreme Court ready to make law based on the Bible and Roe/Wade will most likely be overturned. Our founding fathers will be rolling in their graves at the thought of coming closer to a theocracy.
Wow. The guy that made the first comment on this post was really smart! :) Hope you are doing well, Jerry.
ReplyDeleteExcept he links religion to what he thinks the law on abortion should be. I thought we should leave religion out of law and politics.
DeleteWhat his point about gun rights has to do with abortion I'm not sure, but militia means militia.
I believe the post correctly points out the legal conditions of abortion before Roe/Wade and what those conditions will be if Roe/Wade is overturned.
The posts prediction that Roe/Wade would be overturned is correct and I really don't have a problem with States deciding their own abortion laws.
My disagreement is whether the government has a right to tell people what they can, or cannot do with their bodies. I don't like abortion. I think abortion is bad, but who am I, or who is the government to tell a woman she cannot do with her body what she feels is right? This goes beyond abortion. What if the government mandated vaccinations under a public safety policy?
Good to hear from you. As you can see I don't post much anymore because my frustration with both sides being wacko extremists leaves little for serious political debate.
Jerry, I agree with your larger sentiment here, with the caveat that the unborn human is not a part of the woman's body.
ReplyDeleteI totally disagree with that. By any definition medical, physical, or spiritual the fetus is a part of the woman's body. Please explain why you think it is not.
DeleteIllinois should be green. I didn't check all the states.
ReplyDelete