Skip to comments.Members of Congress ask Supreme Court to 'reconsider' landmark Roe v. Wade abortion ruling
Posted on 01/05/2020 5:25:38 AM PST by Morgana
Washington (CNN)More than 200 members of Congress are urging the Supreme Court to reconsider -- if not overrule -- the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion nationwide. Thirty-nine Republican senators and 168 members of the House of Representatives, almost all of them Republicans, signed a so-called "friend of the court" brief filed on Thursday by the national anti-abortion group Americans United for Life in connection with a challenge to a Louisiana abortion access law due to be heard in March. The signers include Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Mike Lee and Mitt Romney of Utah, and Tim Scott of South Carolina as well as Reps. Steve Scalise of Louisiana, Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Steve Chabot of Ohio. At least two Democrats -- Reps. Collin Peterson of Minnesota and Dan Lipinski of Illinois -- are among the lawmakers who signed.
The brief argues that "Roe's jurisprudence has been haphazard from the beginning." The decision "remains a radically unsettled precedent" that "has been substantially undermined by subsequent authority," the group continues, adding that court rulings since Roe "clearly did not settle the abortion issue." The group urges the justices to "reconsider those precedents." The Louisiana case before the court does not directly target Roe. The law at issue requires a doctor to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the facility where the abortion is performed, which critics say is not medically justified. The Republican brief comes on the heels of nearly 200 congressional Democrats filing a brief last month defending Roe and Louisiana abortion providers.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
I saw it in the Wall Street Journal.
I don’t think it’s Constitutionally appropriate for members of Congress and the Senate to be writing letters to the Supreme Court as if they were average citizens. Their Constitutional role is to pass laws, not petition nine black-robed demigods.
Sounds like to me they want to be re-elected and have figured out being pro life is the way to go
A good start would be to defund Planned Abortionhood.
Why not? You don't give up your First Amendment rights when you're elected to Congress.
The real question is that should the Supreme Court strike down Roe next June then what impact that will have on the election?
They need to try doing their jobs as legislators. For example, there still court cases in progress regarding the contraception mandate under the Affordable Care Act, when Congress could clarify the legislation to take the issue out of the hands of HHS and the courts.
Appropriate, I said. Yes, they have First Amendment rights out the wazoo, and they exercise nothing else, certainly not their power as elected legislators - I repeat, legislators - to pass laws.
Willard the Abortion King of MASS is pretending to be pro-life...
Have been looking and have been involved in this issue for so long. I don’t think it will ever end, as long as Americans are so morally devoid.
We just don’t value marriage or family or even children enough to ever make this a reality. Look at the “me too” women ...look at the materialism. We are a very selfish and materialistic lot.
In my own life, I knew a friend who aborted weeks before their grandiose wedding ...couldn’t upset the family, you know ....couldn’t cancel the invitations. It’s all too much for show. The said friend told me she was “giving this one back to God for “safe keeping.” After I pleaded with her for days not to do it ....this is how she rationalized it ....because this is what our culture says ... if it feels right to you, if you can rationalize that it’s right, then it is.
That’s going to take more than laws to fix. I mean - I’m glad they’re trying, but even laws won’t help our empty souls. We have no moral absolutes in many quarters ...even “good” people think this way. My friend is a nice person, and a responsible taxpayer, etc. She’s not some sleeze. THESE are where the majority of these abortions happen ...it’s PURE convenience.
My own hope is that AT LEAST we don’t have to fund this nauseating evil with our tax dollars.
Congressmen should not be "asking" the Supreme Court about any law. They MAKE laws!
Roe vs Wade was and always has been unconstitutional legislating from the bench. Congress should have tried, convicted and removed every Justice who approved it. Since Congress didn't, it needs to pass a law specifying that abortion is a matter reserved to the States in accordance with the 10th Amendment and further specifying that is not subject to judicial review.
The whole concept of judicial review of laws for constitutionality is very shaky.
Roe v Wade was as bad a decision as the Dredd Scott decision.
Not only was if flawed in it’s Constitutional reasoning (having to provide some obscure link to the Constitution), it was bad for the nation since it created division when it did not have to).
It will be overturned at some point.
That does not mean that abortions will not still be legal in those states that want it to be legal, but it does mean that the citizens in those states can decides for themselves.
Strangely it also means that fewer woman will die because of abortions since as it stands now most abortion providers do not have to meet any standards (even when there are laws on the book, the feminist fight any effort to enforce them). Because the standards are not enforced you have barely qualified individual performing abortions and often in unsafe circumstances. I suspect more woman have died as a result of legal abortions then died when they were illegal.
I would guess that within 20 years Roe v Wade will be overturned.
This is a law school exam question. The cleanest way is if a case comes up through the system so the jurisdiction is clear. Whether Congress can file its own motion to modify straight to the Supreme Court is a very fascinating question.
There is 0 chance this SC would overturn RvW. We need to flip 2 rat Justices to do that. I suspect these people know that. So this is either an election ploy or worse some of them want to get it in front of this SC to sabotage any effort to overturn for a generation.
Interesting point. In this case, only a minority of Congress and the Senate are behind the petition. It might be different if a resolution were presented and passed by both houses.
In a motion to modify, the argument is that the Court retains continuing jurisdiction to rule in a case where it ruled previously. I think that is how I would plead the jurisdiction.
But does Congress have standing? I guess maybe Congress could apply to be Next Friend for some unborn child. Usually third parties file amicus briefs in an already existing case conveying their position. Surely congress’ legal staff analyzed all this. Wonder if we can get a copy from somewhere of what was filed?
OK, here it is. There is a case out of Louisiana on abortion rights. A bunch of Democrats filed an amicus brief in support and then a bunch of Republicans also filed one. So, the breifs were filed properly in an existing case with original jurisdication. The case is due to come up in March 2020.
Link to amicus brief filed by Democrats.
Have you considered the 1st amendment? Everyone, including you, can petition the SC. A member of Congress has the same rights as you do and the Constitution allows them to petition the SC as you can.
Your ignorance is astounding.
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.