Civic Register
| 5.3.22
Supreme Court Confirms Authenticity of Leaked Draft Opinion in Abortion Case - What Does It Say?
How do you feel about the draft opinion?
What’s the story?
- According to a report by Politico on Monday, a leaked draft of a Supreme Court majority opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito indicates the Court may be prepared to overturn longstanding abortion precedents under Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey and return the issue to the states when the Court decides a pending case regarding Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban.
- While there have in the past been leaks of internal Court deliberations, and a few historical instances where outcomes of a case were released prior to the opinion, the leak of a full draft opinion along with the votes from the Court’s conference is unprecedented.
- On Tuesday morning, the Supreme Court issued a press release stating, “Although the document described in yesterday’s reports is authentic, it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case.” Chief Justice John Roberts said in a statement that the Marshal of the Court has been ordered to investigate the leak and added:
“To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. The work of the Court will not be affected in any way. We at the Court are blessed to have a workforce ― permanent employees and law clerks alike ― intensely loyal to the institution and dedicated to the rule of law. Court employees have an exemplary and important tradition of respecting the confidentiality of the judicial process and upholding the trust of the Court. This was a singular and egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the Court and the community of public servants who work here.”
- It’s unclear from the draft opinion, which is labeled as a “1st Draft” and dated February 10th, whether at least four other justices will in fact support it as a final opinion. Politico reported that four other Republican-appointed justices ― Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett ― voted with Alito. CNN reported that Chief Justice John Roberts doesn’t support completely overturning the precedents, but is willing to uphold Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban.
- After oral arguments in a case, justices typically take a vote on the issues before them and begin to draft opinions that are then shared so that other justices can debate the matter further and suggest changes they would support. As the majority opinion takes shape, concurring and dissenting opinions are drafted and the majority opinion is often revised to address the dissents before the final opinion is published.
- If the draft opinion turns out to be legitimate and is ultimately backed by at least five justices to become the Supreme Court’s opinion, it would be the Court’s most significant reversal of a precedent since Brown v. Board of Education (1954) held that racial segregation as permitted under Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) was unconstitutional.
- Here’s a look at some of the key passages of the alleged draft majority opinion:
Key passages of the draft opinion
- Justice Samuel Alito's draft opinion began by noting the political divide on the issue of abortion and outlining his view of the history of abortion policy and jurisprudence:
Abortion presents a profound moral issue on which Americans hold sharply conflicting views. Some believe fervently that a human person comes into being at conception and that abortion ends an innocent life. Others feel just as strongly that any regulation of abortion invades a woman’s right to control her own body and prevents women from achieving full equality. Still others in a third group think that abortion should be allowed under some but not all circumstances, and those within this group hold a variety of views about the particular restrictions that should be imposed.
For the first 185 years after the adoption of the Constitution, each State was permitted to address this issue in accordance with the views of its citizens. Then, in 1973, this Court decided Roe v. Wade. Even though the Constitution makes no mention of abortion, the Court held that it confers a broad right to obtain one. It did not claim that American law or the common law had ever recognized such a right, and its survey of history ranged from the constitutionally irrelevant (e.g., its discussion of abortion in antiquity) to the plainly incorrect (e.g., its assertion that abortion was probably never a crime under the common law). After cataloguing a wealth of other information having no bearing on the meaning of the Constitution, the opinion concluded with a numbered set of rules much like those that might be found in a statute enacted by a legislature.
Under this scheme, each trimester of pregnancy was regulated differently, but the most critical line was drawn at roughly the end of the second trimester, which, at the time, corresponded to the point at which a fetus was thought to achieve “viability”, i.e., the ability to survive outside the womb. Although the Court acknowledged that States had a legitimate interest in protecting “potential life,” it found that this interest could not justify any restriction on previability abortions. The Court did not explain the basis for this line, and even abortion supporters have found it hard to defend Roe’s reasoning. One prominent constitutional scholar wrote that he “would vote for a statute very much like the one the Court end[ed] up drafting” if he were “a legislator,” but his assessment of Roe was memorable and brutal: Roe was “not constitutional law” at all and gave almost no sense of an obligation to try to be.
At the time of Roe, 30 States still prohibited abortion at all stages. In the years prior to that decision, 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. As Justice Byron White aptly put it in his dissent, the decision represented the “exercise of raw judicial power,” and it sparked a national controversy that has embittered our political culture for a half-century.
- Alito’s draft also discussed Casey, which sought to uphold Roe under the doctrine of stare decisis (letting precedent stand) but also “did a fair amount of overruling” as the justice noted:
Several important abortion decisions were overruled in toto, and Roe itself was overruled in part. Casey threw out Roe’s trimester scheme and substituted a new rule of uncertain origin under which States were forbidden to adopt any regulation that imposed an “undue burden” on a woman’s right to have an abortion. The decision provided no clear guidance about the difference between a “due” and an “undue” burden. But the three Justices who authored the controlling opinion “call[ed] the contending sides of a national controversy to end their national division” by treating the Court’s decision as the final settlement of the question of the constitutional right to abortion.
- Alito’s draft opinion went on to state that Roe and Casey must be overturned:
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, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely―the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. That provision has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such right must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.”
The right to an abortion does not fall within this category. Until the latter part of the 20th century, such a right was entirely unknown in American law. Indeed, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, three quarters of the States made abortion a crime at all stages of pregnancy. The abortion right is also critically different from any other right that this Court has held to fall within the Fourteenth Amendment’s protection of “liberty.” Roe’s defenders charcterize the abortion right as similar to the rights recognized in past decisions involving matters such as intimate sexual relations, contraception, and marriage, but abortion is fundamentally different, as both Roe and Casey acknowledged, because it destroys what those decisions called “fetal life” and what the law now before us describes as an “unborn human being.”
- The draft opinion noted that contrary to the argument made by the Biden administration’s solicitor general that upholding the Mississippi law could undercut other constitutional rights, the majority opinion would do no such thing and would apply solely to abortion:
Unable to show concrete reliance on Roe and Casey themselves, the Solicitor General suggests that overruling those decisions would “threaten the Court’s precedents holding that the Due Process Clause protects other rights.” That is not correct for reasons we have already discussed. As even the Casey plurality recognized “[a]bortion is a unique act” because it terminates “life or potential life.” 505 U.S., at 852; see also Roe, 410 U.S., at 159 (abortion “is inherently different from marital intimacy,” “marriage,” or “procreation”). And to ensure that our decision is not misunderstood or mischaracterized, we emphasize that our decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right. Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.
- The draft opinion emphasized that it’s the Court’s role to evaluate the law and not political considerations or public opinion as it decides cases such as this:
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.
- Alito’s draft opinion concluded:
We end this opinion where we began. Abortion presents a profound moral question. The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected representatives.
RELATED READING
- Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Mississippi Abortion Case (12/1/21)
- Mississippi Asks Supreme Court to Overrule Roe v. Wade in Upcoming Abortion Case (7/23/21)
— Eric Revell
(Photo Credit: iStock.com / clintcpopineau)
The Latest
-
The Long Arc: Taking Action in Times of Change“Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle.” Martin Luther King Jr. Today in read more... Advocacy -
Thousands Displaced as Climate Change Fuels Wildfire Catastrophe in Los AngelesIt's been a week of unprecedented destruction in Los Angeles. So far the Palisades, Eaton and other fires have burned 35,000 read more... Environment -
Puberty, Privacy, and PolicyOn December 11, the Montana Supreme Court temporarily blocked SB99 , a law that sought to ban gender-affirming care for read more... LGBTQIA+ -
Women Are Shaping This Election — Why Is the Media Missing It?As we reflect on the media coverage of this election season, it’s clear that mainstream outlets have zeroed in on the usual read more... Elections
Climate & Consumption
Health & Hunger
Politics & Policy
Safety & Security
Welcome back to the seventeenth century, a government guided by Puritanical values and an elite group of Supreme Court right-wing, ‘let-them-eat-cake’, Federalist Society activist ‘Inquisitors’ to force their puritanical views into law.
The initial ‘Roe’ Supreme Court ruling was predicated on other constitutional guarantees, the same ones that led to the right to privacy, availability and personal use of contraceptives and other broadly accepted and utilized ‘rights’. Just as the draft opinion notes that the word ‘abortion’ does not appear in the Constitution, neither does the ‘right to privacy’ nor the personal use of contraceptives. These and other rights predicated by the same constitutional guarantees can no longer be accepted as guaranteed rights since, if the original Roe decision is invalid, all rights predicated by the same rights must also be invalid.
The neo-Inquisitor Justices have violated the law that they are sworn to uphold in their ruling to let the Texas abortion law stand until they can rule on it. Prior rulings of the Supreme Court are the law of the land and should govern everyone, including Supreme Court members themselves, until they can collectively and formally rule on changes to the law. These activist right-wing Justices placed themselves above standing law in allowing Texas to effectively overturn the law of the land, even temporarily. The Supreme Court’s role is to interpret the law and to use existing law to ensure that no newer legislation violates prior law of greater standing. That’s it.
The right-wing activist Justices have placed themselves and their opinions above the very law that they have sworn to protect.
The Justices have all pointed out the duty of the public to trust that they are an apolitical institution so that their interpretation of the laws are enforced - since the Supreme Court has no enforcement capabilities (yet). Yet, when the conservative appointees outnumber the liberal appointees, the court’s decisions on major issues remarkably align with the political desires of the Federalist Society and not the political needs of the majority of the people.
Amy Coney Barrett stressed the need of the public to trust the apolitical nature of the Supreme Court in a speech at the Mitch McConnell center at the University of Kentucky with McConnell sitting on stage with her. The height of hypocrisy given the setting of the speech with Mitch McConnell on stage with her.
It is imperative that the Supreme Court be trusted as apolitical interpreters of the law for any of their rulings to be enforced, which is the sole providence of other government Branches.
‘Trust’ is one of those properties that cannot be demanded nor mandated. There is no ‘entitlement’ that assures that Supreme Court Justices nor their decisions be ‘trusted’ if they are by nature ‘untrustworthy’.
‘ Trust’ can only be earned by ‘trustworthy’ actions.
This is why Justices must recuse themselves from any rulings where it could even appear to violate the public trust, something that is mandated and enforced for Executive Branch Civil Service employees.
This is why the conservative card-carrying Supreme Court Justice members should resign from the Federalist Society (with tremendous support by our country’s wealthy elite to shape the judiciary and groom like minded judges to move to increasing prominent roles).
The Federalist Society represents institutionalized corruption sponsored by the Republican Cartel and paid for by the wealthiest of our wealthy elite. The Republican outrage that a draft decision document was released and not hidden away until it could be dumped on the public after it could no affect the midterms tends to discredit the Supreme Court’s apolitical claims as well.
This should be a clarion call to all the people whose fundamental rights to abortion, privacy, use contraceptives or anything that is not specifically called out by name in the Constitution are about to be expunged by a politicized Supreme Court activist majority who cannot even abide by the courts own prior rulings before any formal ruling to change the laws are made.
If that actually becomes a ruling they have handed a blue wave in a lot of the U.S.
Only 30% approve of overturning Roe vs Wade. Republicans never, contrary to what they always preach, legislate what the majority desires.
I do agree abortion numbers coming down would be great. IMO however, I think a better decision would be to leave the decision to the mother and doctor and have solid outreach to teach and provide better alternatives, to include birth control which could also reduce abortion numbers.
It is a complex issue no matter how you look at it.
For some strange reason my comment was posted but no longer. So here it goes again.
Despite anyone's stand on abortion laws, at this juncture, the leaked SCOTUS document is the predominant issue at hand. All measures should be taken to identify the person(s) involved and prosecuted to the fullest extent.
If the Constitution does not mention abortion rights, then the Supreme Court must let the abortion rights be decided on the state level.
This is not what America wants. I hope it does not happen.
I am opposed to a nationwide ban on unlimited abortions but am totally supportive of the SCOTUS draft decision to place abortion regulation (or no regulation) exactly where it Constitutionally belongs....under the authority of the individual states as directed by the voters of each state.
Conservative voters don't realize the slippery slope they are rooting for. If I need a kidney, should the state have the power to force you to give it to me under penalty of law?
Preventing women and girls from accessing an abortion does not mean they stop needing one. That’s why attempts to ban or restrict abortions do nothing to reduce the number of abortions, it only forces people to seek out unsafe abortions.
this is an obvious way to keep women poor, and as 2nd class citizens.
Forcing someone to carry on an unwanted pregnancy, or forcing them to seek out an unsafe abortion, is a violation of their human rights, including the rights to privacy and bodily autonomy.
An egregious leak!? Hell no AN EGREGIOUS BETRAYAL is what this is.
first gorsuch & kavanaugh need to be off the bench for lying under oath during selection hearings
their agenda, tactics, lies, obfuscations, intent, plotting are all clearly evident
women of america you have a choice to make! 2022 elections are going to decide you AND this country's future
fence sitters time to get on the right side of history
Shame on congress
shame on scotus ... 13 & term limits NOW
Abortion is the greatest human rights violation of my lifetime. Though I wish that abortion would be made illegal at least this is a start and puts the issue back into the hands of the states.
There have been issues how this law was written - but all of you will be screaming about how this takes away YOUR right as a woman - my body my choice stuff - but it isn't just your body or just your choice - there is a fetus/baby and in most cases a father involved
And once again there are a plethora of birth control choices along with condoms and the morning after pill so not sure why abortion remains such a "popular" choice - and frankly more concerned re no time limits re abortion including Roe vs Wade - at a certain point that child is moving and is viable outside the womb and for sure that's NOT just your body
The states can decide but scream away and very concerned re someone LEAKING the decision - that is very uncool - but of course she/he/it will be praised to the nth degree
Wonder how you'd all feel if your mother made the choice to abort - oh, right, you wouldn't be here
Roe was written poorly and this issue is not supported in the Constitution. It belongs to the States to decide.
There are legal scholars and political scowlers, the Supreme Court with Roe v Wade did create a "right" not enumerated in the Constitution and thus reserved to the States and their legislatures.
Justice Alito's majority opinion if issued will simply restore the issue back into the hands of individual States, which is where it belongs.
Senators and Congresspeople should not support any efforts to Federalize, allow the states to work it out.
The Roe draft will cause an increase in rape and domestic violence as bad men will feel empowered to control women just like racists feld empowered by Donald J. Trump.
Women's rights are being taken away. The person who leaked the draft is our hero!
While I don't care what a woman does with her body, I wholeheartedly don't agree to KILLING an innocent fetus especially up and until birth.
I also do not want to TAXPAYERS to pay for someone recklessness. I can understand if the pregnancy was the result of being raped or incest, but just because people are so careless, is beyond me. There are many forms of birth control and also the morning after pill. This should not be up for debate.
Republicans continue in their racist quest to deny hard earned rights to American people. Abortion rights are on deck to be stripped away suddenly. Women will be bound by the success on the religious beliefs of Republicans.
our democracy is being broken and eliminated in favor of the authorianism choice of governing by Republicans.
They are enslaving many black,brown and poor women and forcing pregnancy upon them as dictated by the federal government's reach into personal,medical and intimate decisions about a woman's right to have control of her body.
It is disgraceful!!
Gee jimK, you sound so smart. You know what sounds so Federalist these days? The Democratic Party. They want to rule everything. Nobody else's opinion matters if they don't agree with them. If you don't agree with them they dox you, cancel you, assault you physically or verbally. They seem to want to be in charge of everything in this country and to hell with anyone else. A Federalist Party: favors a strong centralized government and the Democratic Party wants to be that centralized government. You always seem to have all the leaker activists who sneaks around in all our government institutions breaking laws or protocols and gets away with it because you make it look like something devious is going on to make the other side look bad when your the ones doing exactly what your accusing the other side of doing. No longer is this a society of civil liberties given by law to all citizens. Because if you don't like the laws you tear the system down. If the Supreme Court does end up deciding on this rule, which isn't final yet, it implies they want to give the decision of abortion to the states. If you don't like the rules of the state you have the opportunity to vote people in or out. There are plenty of states run by democrats. Unfortunately I'm in one. I doubt that ALL the states will subordinate it's power to a central authority. Hence, becoming a Federalist Party. And just like you, I don't want an all Democratic Party any more than you not wanting an all Republican Party. This country is pretty much split in half. And right now the Supreme Court has the majority of conservative judges. But they don't always vote that way. But liberals pretty much do. Because your always so desperately hungry for power more than anything, it won't be long before you stack the court to get your own way. Democrats have changed this country so far left your not for the people anymore. This country has lost its morals, respect and patriotism. You say it's taking us out of the dark ages or from shameful times in our history. That is true to a point. But when you have people pitting people against each other, riots burning down people homes and business, Murdering and beating people on our streets and letting them get away with it, teaching grammar school children sex education of all sexes instead of there parents parenting them and let them have there innocence for as long as they can, or indoctrinating them with CRT, telling them if your white your inherently a racist and if your of color you'll always be the underdog and won't have what the white person has. A lot of our children are coming out of school with no respect for others. They won't listen to opinions. They have a chip on there shoulders like everyone owes them a living. They want to start at the top with position and the money. There selfish know it alls and there ignorant, not really knowing what there talking about. Now I'm not saying there all like this. But you see a lot of this in college students protesting over everything. You use to go to college to get ideas and listen to different opinions. But not any more. They Won't listen to other opinions and don't peacefully protest and will physically fight you over it. Which is the kind of people I see now tearing down our institutions. And Democrat politicians want there socialist agendas pushed through so they cover for them. To hell with the rules and laws of those institutions. We have two main parties in this country. Right now unfortunately it's under democratic rule. You can tell because they raised the cost of living and blamed republicans. They took away our energy independence and left us dependent on our enemies. So gas goes up and they blame it on greedy oil companies or Russia. They complain wages aren't high enough. Then when people get a raise they flood the economy with trillions and cause inflation and blame republicans. They got 13 of our military murdered with the withdrawal from Afghanistan stating he had to do it because it was Trumps deadline and tried again to blame republicans. Millions of people crossing our now open border recieving medical educational and housing benefits raising the cost of all these services that we indirectly pay for. Democrats play down this disaster and say these poor people have the right because of there root causes. And blame republicans for being heartless. But Ukraine people are being slaughtered and they have to have paper work and know someone here to get in. Now on the 22nd or 23rd the COVID policy to stop people from coming into the country with COVID will be lifted, again flooding even more over the border and once again blaming republicans as it was the Trump administration that made that policy. They mandated everything so much and for so long that people lost there business and professions. Now there's so many openings for jobs and no one wants them. Some don't want to go back to work they've been out for so long. Some found a different way to make a living. Maybe some living off the money they got from the government to stay a float and two and three times the unemployment and/or didn't have to pay rent. There's a lot of reasons. But one thing is for sure, the economy is ruined. We're in an inflation and heading for a recession. Things have really changed drastically since democrats have been in power. Life really got better didn't it? Oh but I forgot ... it's republicans fault. Or it's Trump's fault. Or it's still from COVID. Or it's Russia's fault. It's always someone else's fault. Now it's the Supreme Court. You want to know why abortion is such a hot topic. It's because of democrats. Always taking things to the extreme. It wasn't enough to get an abortion after 13 weeks. But then things like partial birth abortions and abortions at birth came along. Disgusting! And if you don't think so, your disgusting. It's because people are more concerned about there own selfish life than that of a full grown baby. Except in case of the life of the mother, medical problems and rape or incest, then do it as early as possible. Which is how most reasonable people think. In this day and age nobody not knows about all the conterceptions. And if they don't then teach that in school after 10 years old in what we use to call health class. If that's not enough because of coarse the poor can't afford them then protest for policies to give conterceptives to the poor. Kinda like giving out needles to druggies. And if that's still not enough then keep your damn legs crossed!!!
It is a draft opinion and nothing less.
put the leaker in jail as this is the larger problem here.
Dems will politicize, but they either done care to condem the action or made it happen to help them change the narrative away from their utter failures.
I think we should pass a law to make anti-abortion activist adopt children, after all they're interfering with other people's lives so how about we interfere with their lives. Or they can put their beliefs or their money and their mouth is which lol never do because there's just a pile of bullshit who want to Manipulate and control othe peoples lives.
This possible ruling striking down Roe V. Wade is appalling! If this happens, abortion won't be the first privacy right to be struck down. We won't go back!
I cannot believe that this country is going backwards as far as bodily autonomy is concerned. This heinous act will cause death and destruction.
The right to abortion is a fundamental right for women to decide what they want to do with their bodies. It is an economic issue for all of us. Please work hard to codify a woman's right to choose.
After draft abortion leak, Justice Thomas says Supreme Court can’t be ‘bullied’
will someone tell this pseudo he carries zero credibilty so go to the back of the bench and stay quiet as you did for decades
no one is bullying ... simply a manifestation of a self sullied court
roberts should direct his frustrations at his own court and come clean on the plotting behind the scenes readying for the moment when they can strike as a majority with roberts joining the minority to make it look clean! Yea we ain't dummies. we can smell a rat in the scum infested right wing as the stench is now simply unbearable
its now up to women to show in 2022 where this country is headed
Forewarned! Think of "interracial marriage", "Same Sex Marriage", "Contraception"...and more.
I have read the draft, and the decision on Roe vs Wade, and the contitutional grounds for RvW is strong while this draft is far weaker, and depends upon reinterpreting the intent of the founders as being quite different than the text of the document. If the decision is as indicated, I only hope that the actual decision is reworded to be based upon different arguments that do not shred the constitution and the rule of law. Even if it does stand, Congress needs to act to properly reflect the will of the people (who overwhelmingly support the right to abortion) and the constitution by enacting Federal law protect the right to normal womans and reproductive health services and abortion.
This basically revokes women's right to privacy. Yet the GOP complaines that the Court's right to privacy was violated by the leak! I find that hypocritical or perhaps only certain entities have a right to privacy now?!? This will only stop safe abortions.
This isn't about life..:it's about controlling women & their right to control their bodies; a right men enjoy!
Why did a health issue become a political issue?!?
Kicking this back to the States basically means those States that have or plan to restrict this health care for women is allowing basically male minorities in their legislatures to decide what the female majorities want & the voters aren't even allowing them to vote in it! Find that totally inappropriate & unacceptable!
Thenk you for listening. 😷👍
Woman need to be able to have the healthcare they deserve. That includes reproductive rights. Before legalizing abortion, woman went to extremes and many lost their lives to obtain the care they needed. Reproductive rights are pro life, they protect the women that are carrying a fetus. They give her the freedom to make healthy, appropriate decisions that will suite her best. This should not be a choice made by others but a choice of the woman carrying that fetus. Such a weighted decision should be made by her, without the worry of being sued or incarcerated.
Side note: religion should never be associated with law. Inserting religion into law is unconstitutional.
Supporters of privacy and a woman's right to choose worked over 50 years ago to secure these freedoms. It's been a long-term struggle ever since. The recent SCOTUS draft ruling is not based on science but religious beliefs, and should not be considered a so-called freedom in a democratic republic. Not only did Justice Alito cite a source who in a previous century was a proponent of burning witches, the Justice falsely claims other rights are not at stake when Roe is inevitably overturned--not true. The Republican-appointed justices all lied in their Senate confirmation hearings when asked about precedent and we knew it. If Senator Collins did not, she should not be in office. That leads to Mitch McConnell, the ruthless hypocrite, who vowed to block President Obama's SCOTUS nominees (and Clinton's if she was elected) and proceeded to hold one nominee (Garland) a year before the 2016 election. Later, Mitch did not hesitate to rush to confirm, not one, but three of the Federalist Society's (via Trump) offerings; one was just weeks before the 2020 election. The Republican machine has worked to repeal Roe for many decades and now they've caught the proverbial car. (Please remember these same anti-choice zealots do not care one iota about babies/children post-birth.) No rejoicing in their victory though, because they know 70% of Americans do not want to give up our rights to privacy. The leak is a perfect distraction from the GOP horror that is pending for all of us. Protest, call your 3 representative in Congress, donate and vote! Elections and lust for power over women indeed have severe consequences.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The founders knew that not everything was in the Cositution so they provided the People several means to modify it.
Congressional laws, President executive orders, State laws and Governor's executive orders are designed to be flexible for the moment. And sometimes bad laws are made.
The Consitution was designed to be the governing principles that is the foundation of our government.
I think as a people we need to decide what "ourselves and our Posterity" means and should admend the Consitution to reflect that.
Chief "justice??" John Roberts claims to be appalled by the leak of "justice??" Alito's draft opinion regarding Roe v Wade. It is my hope that one of my representatives will share my opinion directly with all of the conservative "justices???" On the Supreme Court. I, as well as the overwhelming majority of Americans, am appalled and disgusted with the politically aligned court and no longer have any faith in a failed court to issue fair and equitable decisions. Why? First and foremost, you have failed to uphold 50 years of failed contests of Roe v Wade and prior Supreme Court decisions. You have determined that a woman has no right to control her own body and that a state legislature, which I might remind you, is predominantly male controlled. In my opinion each of the last three Republican appointees to the court perjured themselves under oath during their confirmation hearing regarding their position on Roe v. Wade. They already new how they would vote or rule and blatantly lied in order to secure confirmation and a lifetime appointment to the court. They are no better than politicians or con men/women who will lie through their teeth to get what they want. This potential ruling flies in the face of what is supposed to be a clear separation of Church and State and it is clearly evident that this potential ruling is done to satisfy anti abortion religious groups and right wing Christian and evangelicals, thus securing their votes for the Republican Party. In other words, it is a purely political decision. No justice Roberts, I no longer have an iota of faith in the less than Supreme Court and their collective non political alignments. Just a bunch of politial hacks wearing black robes who are beholding to those that nominate them and will say anything to secure their lifetime appointment. Appropriate robe color as black is the color of mourning and for me, this is the death of a neutral Supreme Court who decide on merit as opposed to political alignments. I wonder how gun control issues under the second amendment escape similar scrutiny. When the second amendment was written, we were a new born nation with no standing army, police force or national guard. Defense of this country and one's property against foreign nations, criminals (like politicians) and native American's (whose land we were stealing hand over fist) was left to individuals and or malitias. Those circumstances no longer exist yet you fail to interpret the constitution and bill of rights in favor of gun control. If I were a woman, forced to bear a child to birth, against my will, I would deliver that child to a conservative justice or pro life legislator for them to raise, care for, provide food, shelter, health care and education costs for the rest of that child's life. You are allowing States to directly control abortion and a woman's control over HER body but no one can force that woman to bear the expense, mental, physical, emotional and financial burdens associated with an unwanted pregnancy. I wonder, should we pass laws allowing a woman to demand her spouse have a vasectomy in order to avoid unwanted pregnancy? If the husband refuses, should he be fined and threatened with imprisonment? No mr. Chief "justice??" I challenge your right to be appalled! As it is we, the overwhelming majority of Americans who should be appalled at the decision of the court, draft or no draft, and the clear perjury of justices under oath regarding their real belief and position. You are all the best argument for term limitations on the Supreme Court and removal provisions for failing to be anything more or less than a political hack. Again, it is my most sincere hope that one or all of my elected representatives will share this opinion verbatim with the Supreme Court, but, frankly, I won't hold my breath.
Our current SCOTUS are useless Trump Puppets since the Trumpers have the majority. Thanks to crooked Mitch McConnell who ignored the citizens and supported his daddy, Trump, by improperly holding off the nomimination of a truely qualified potential judge for the SCOTUS. We have a mess for years to come. And the Trumpers on the SCOTUS are not Constiutional experts as they proclaim.