Skip to comments.207 Senators and Congressmen Say Roe v Wade is ‘Unworkable’
Posted on 01/03/2020 8:40:19 PM PST by marshmallow
Ahead of a Supreme Court hearing, more than 200 members of Congress have signed on to support Louisianas abortion regulations, and have asked the Court to address Roes unworkable finding of a right to abortion.
39 senators and 168 members of the House representing 38 states signed on to an amicus brief filed on Thursday by Americans United for Life, in the case of Gee v. June Medical Services, LLC. The brief argues that Louisianas safety regulations on abortion clinics are constitutional.
In the brief, the lawmakers strongly urge the Court to uphold the decision that kept in place Louisianas abortion regulations.
Furthermore, they argue that the Courts current abortion jurisprudence, such as the Casey decision, which forbade states from putting undue burdens on abortion access, reveals that the right to abortion outlined in the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision is unworkable.
The Court, the lawmakers say, should again take up the issue of whether Roe and Casey should be reconsidered and, if appropriate, overruled.
Louisianas law, the Unsafe Abortion Protection Act, was sponsored by Democratic State Rep. Katrina Jackson and signed by then-Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) in 2014. It was immediately challenged in court.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicherald.co.uk ...
If women are going to have a legal right to murder a dependent family member, then I want every man to have that very same right.
Even Leftist Feminist law professors have given up on Roe v. Wade. They don’t try to defend the decision, they just say “it’s settled law”. The decision makes no sense. Everyone should read it. It’s the all-time greatest example of a flex. They did it because they could.
is there a single Democrat who is pro-life?
"Louisianas law, the Unsafe Abortion Protection Act, was sponsored by Democratic State Rep. Katrina Jackson. . . ."
the question is for national level democrats not state level.
And they should also read Rehnquist's excellent dissent from Roe v. Wade.
Massachusetts is EXPANDING abortions, calling their new bill the ‘New Roe Act”- The liberals scums aint gonna be happy till they start murdering breathing born alive babies
Yes. Sadly, I don't think there is a single pro-life Democrat in either house of Congress.
Rhere were a few but they got drummed out.
Yes! It’s amazing how few even Pro Life people have actually read it! The majority opinion no sense. It was “based” on an opinion that made no sense, that was written by a notorious degenerate (shocking!). Rehnquist’s dissent actually makes sense.
Rehnquist might end up being underappreciated even on the right side. As much has I love Thomas and Scalia, Rehnquist might exceed them both in the end just for that one! Depends on how you score it. Thomas is hard to beat on words per impact. Word for word, Clarence Thomas is the GOAT.
If an argument is made and won in court that it is a human being, not “just cells,” the murder charges will look after themselves.
In stark contrast to the rights that the early states expressly protected in the Bill of Rights, and other constitutionally enumerated rights later amended to the constitution by the states, the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect the murder of unborn children as a right.
And since there is no express constitutional right to murder unborn children, corrupt federal lawmakers have no 14th Amendment power to regulate, tax and spend for politically correct abortion.
In other words, Roe v. Wade was a major constitutional scandal imo.
More specifically, Roe v. Wade not only gave corrupt, post-17th Amendment ratification career Democrats and RINOs an incentive to exploit low-information women voters by winning their votes with never-ending campaign promises of constitutionally indefensible federal funding for abortion, but evidenced by the failed Kavanaugh smear, misguided Democrats fight tooth-and-nail to maintain a pro-abortion Supreme Court activist justice majority since the murder of unborn children is clearly not an express constitutional right.
Remember in November!
MAGA! Now KAGA! (Keep America Great Always!)
Alan Keyes has spoken about this and sorry I don’t have time at present to find a link. He was on infowars recently as a guest and spoke about it. Basically that there is verbiage in Roe V Wade saying that if personhood is ever defined it would be invalid. Keyes says since Roe V Wade was upheld, personhood has been defined through DNA. The fact that an unborn child has unique DNA separate from the mother defines his/her personhood. That DNA has been used in different legal cases and could be used to officially challenge Roe V Wade without new legislation. I am writing what I remember so I hope someone has the time at present to give a youtube link. Keyes says basically that Roe V Wade is already nullified. Again apologies for this sketchy post. I have a very good excuse.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.