Election 2012

The Path to Overturning Roe

Irin Carmon reports on the plan to destroy reproductive rights:

Here’s what’s important to know about the right’s plan for Roe: It will be slow, and it will be indirect — to avoid a backlash — but the inexorable goal is to overturn it and ban abortion wherever possible. With an eye toward the court’s oldest member, women’s rights pioneer Ruth Bader Ginsburg, antiabortion activists would be counting on a President Romney to appoint one or more justices who would upset the fragile 5-4 balance that currently maintains the federal right to an abortion. In the meantime, they’ve been working hard to lay the groundwork to get a case before the Court that would allow justices to revisit, and possibly overturn, Roe.

“The antiabortion groups are busy trying to fill the pipeline with cases that could present vehicles to revisit the abortion issue, either tangentially or frontally,” says Supreme Court expert and author Linda Greenhouse, who has written extensively about Roe. “And the pro-choice groups, on the other hand, are not appealing even adverse rulings, because they don’t want such a vehicle to get to the Court” — even the current, shakily pro-choice court. “Right now,” says Greenhouse, “we have a standoff.”

And because too many voters viewed the first debate as an episode of American Idol, the Republicans are this close to overturning Roe and handing over the reproductive organs of more than half the population to the control of a Republican government.

And, by the way, it's worth noting that the Romney/Ryan Republicans would make it more expensive and more challenging to carry a pregnancy to term by cutting Medicaid by $1.7 trillion, by de-funding Planned Parenthood and cutting SCHIP.

Women -- the Republican Party would essentially own your body. Vote accordingly.

(h/t Thomas Soldan Attorney at Law)

  • GrafZeppelin127

    Look: Roe will never be overturned. If for no other reason, the GOP and its aligned organizations get too much political mileage, and more to the point $$$$$, out of promising to overturn it and making people think that if they just vote Republican one more time, they will.

    That’s not to say that they won’t continue to chop away at its margins at the state level. But the Supreme Court has never, ever taken away, or even narrowed the scope of, a substantive right that it has already determined exists. The Court is loathe to find new, unenumerated substantive rights, but it has never decided that a person has a right to [X] and then subsequently decided, “On second thought, we can make [X] illegal.”

    The only way that right goes away is if we start giving substantive rights to zygotes, (i.e., Personhood), thereby making abortion a homicide and subjecting its legality and availability to the rubric of justifiable homicide. Can the Court do that? I don’t think so; not without a Constitutional Amendment. Even if it could, even if a zygote becomes a “person” for the purpose of homicide statutes, there will still be legal issues around the mother’s rights with respect to that “person.”

    There are plenty of reasons to worry about a more conservative Court. I just don’t think this is at the top of the list.

  • muselet

    Over at Sadly, No! Cerberus puts it, let us say, somewhat more bluntly:

    Any woman who votes for the Republican Party for any reason is a fucking moron at this point. I’m sorry, ladies, but they couldn’t make it any more obvious that they hate you without being the director from A Serbian Film.


  • armyofone

    I want to know if a woman becomes pregnant during a rape “that’s something God intended.” does this mean the rapist is doing the Lord’s work?

    What’s also interesting that the righties want to force rapists to become fathers as well.

    Would someone who knows a little more religion than I do, please expain this to me…..

    • Ipecac

      It depends on whether it’s an emergency rape, a forced rape or a legitimate rape. It’s science!

  • Ipecac

    There’s an article over on Firedoglake that reasonably concludes that whether or not its “immoral” to vote for President Obama, it is preferable to electing Romney. The Firebaggers, however, are all in arms over this conclusion and declaring their intentions to vote for Jill Stein. Of course, when Roe v. Wade is overturned, DADT is reinstated, and the nation takes another lurch to the far right, these people have their heads so far up their ass they still won’t admit they’re partly responsible.

    The main argument they’re making is that a Democratic congress would oppose many of Romney’s initiatives, but they won’t oppose Obama’s.

    Sigh. And I was hoping to avoid blood pressure medication.

    • i_a_c

      So many people have forgotten everything that happened in the Bush Administration. If they think a Democratic Congress would oppose Romney every step of the way, they’ve got another think coming. There were a handful of them that rolled over for Bush every chance they got. Not just that, but Democrats actually believe in a functioning government.

      These people find new ways to be betrayed all the time. They must get a kick out of perpetually playing the victim.

    • D_C_Wilson

      And they’ll blame Obama for the next lurch to the right because he failed to give them the perfect progressive pony that they wanted.

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

    Nailed it, Bob. Thank you.

  • rob black

    “The Handmaids Tale”: Dystopian nightmare…or Republican “Users Guide” for woman’s bodies?
    Why is the term “Republican Woman” not a laughable oxymoron like “Genteel Slave Master” or “Compassionate Sadist”?
    If anyone in this country started talking about exerting the kind of control over men, that Republican’s routinely assert should be applied to women, there would be an actual civil war.
    There is a kind of deep physiological ugliness going on with this strategy. It is nothing less than an attempt to “infantize” over half the population. The level of power it implies is nothing less than the worst dictatorships that ever existed…..and if you can apply it to woman, it will be easily extended to men.
    If abortion is made illegal in all cases, you are one step closer to forced sterilization of any societal group that is deemed “undesirable” by the state. One very large step.
    Reproductive rights are not a “woman’s issue”, they are a human rights issue.
    The Republican’s rather transparent strategy is to hammer away at the fringe of it, until they are able to move the narrative to the right. They distanced themselves from the first candidate to blurt it out, even though it is part of their platform. After a few more, they wont bother to even do that.
    The real implications for this election should scare the shit out of everyone, but especially women. Once these rights are taken away, the very mechanism that took them away…..insures they will never be won again.

    • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

      If I could “like” your post a thousand times, I would. Thank you.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=663669914 Sean Richardson

      “They distanced themselves from the first candidate to blurt it out, even though it is part of their platform. After a few more, they wont bother to even do that.”

      They already are not bothering to repudiate Mourdock.

  • gescove

    Appointments to the Supreme Court may be the most important reason to re-elect President Obama.

    • KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker

      Unless you think your womenfolk should be barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen.