The so-called “right” to abortion that was created by the Supreme Court in 1973 has been under fire ever since Justice Harry Blackmun wrote in that opinion:
“If this suggestion of personhood is established, [the pro-abortion] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment.”
Now the justices are being informed, bluntly, that the time has come for that decision to be reversed.
A report posted on ABC explains that Mississippi’s attorney general is arguing to the court that states should be allowed to decide whether, and how, to regulate abortion.
“Under the Constitution, may a state prohibit elective abortions before viability? Yes. Why? Because nothing in constitutional text, structure, history, or tradition supports a right to abortion,” AG Lynn Fitch write in the brief filed on Thursday.
The report explained, “The arguments are a direct challenge to the central finding of the court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and its 1992 decision in a Pennsylvania abortion case. Both rulings said states may not put an ‘undue burden’ on abortion before viability. The Mississippi attorneys argue that the rulings are ‘egregiously wrong.’”
In fact, the Constitution does not discuss abortion and the “right” to that procedure was created out of the implications of the right to privacy.
The high court now has, on the surface, a 6-3 conservative majority although very few decisions actually are decided along those ideological lines.
It’s a result of President Trump’s appointments of Amy Comey Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch, who all have disappointed conservatives at some point in their recent list of decisions.
Weeks ago, the court affirmed it will hear arguments about a Mississippi law that bans abortion at 15 weeks.
The report explained abortion activists fret that if the law is affirmed, “that could clear the way for states to enact more restrictions on the procedure, including bans on abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, as early as six weeks.”
Mississippi’s statute was adopted in 2018 but hasn’t been enforced because of the interference of a federal court.
The AG argued that, “That law rationally furthers valid interests in protecting unborn life, women’s health, and the medical profession’s integrity. It is therefore constitutional.”
The brief added that circumstances have changed since the Supreme Court ruling nearly five decades ago.
“Today, adoption is accessible and on a wide scale women attain both professional success and a rich family life, contraceptives are more available and effective, and scientific advances show that an unborn child has taken on the human form and features months before viability.
“States should be able to act on those developments.”
In fact, multiple states have worked to adopt “personhood” laws specifically recognizing the unborn as a person, which would open up the opportunity for Blackmun’s warning to become reality.
And while the Supreme Court has followed its 1973 precedent on abortion several times, it also has ruled that states are allowed to limit abortion in many circumstances.
Multiple cases already have noted the huge medical advances since then, and the fact that doctors know much more about the unborn now than they did then. That includes that the procedure actually kills a human being.
Further, there have been suspicions raised about the industry since the Center for Medical Progress conducted undercover video investigations several years ago and found abortionists bragging about the income they could make from selling off the body parts of unborn babies.
One famously said, “I want a Lamborghini.”
While abortionists retaliated by suing the investigators, and claimed that the videos in which they appeared were altered, a federal judge found that was not the case.
The result of the work was that members of Congress reviewed the facts and asked for the Department of Justice to investigate and bring cases against participants if those were supported.
Of course, with a pro-abortion administration in office in Washington, it is unlikely those charges would be filed.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.
The post Supremes told constitutionally, Roe should be overturned was first published by the WND News Center, which makes its content available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience.