Is Roe v. Wade Doomed?

[sellitman]

The Abortion Battle Is Heating Up as States Pass Anti-Abortion Bills
Abortion

March 3, 2006 — South Dakota is not alone. Several other states are turning their heads toward changing abortion laws. Their ultimate goal? To challenge Roe v. Wade all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"What we are seeing is that these states are emboldened by the climate in this country," said NARAL Pro-Choice America President Nancy Keenan. "They see a pro-life president, a pro-life Congress and Senate, and a president who nominated two members to the Supreme Court who he said would be in the mold of Scalia and Thomas."

More: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=1683843&page=1

[thunder35]

1. Scary

[newyawker99]

8. Hi thunder35!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[cali]

2. Yes, but it's not directly threatened by being

overturned. First order on the agenda is to allow so many restrictions that it's no longer a functional constitutional right. Then, when the Court overturns it, it won't appear as drastic. The upcoming Federal PBA case, if allowed to stand, will enlarge the number of permissable restrictions States are allowed to enact. Expect to see States with no clinics and no access even before Roe is overturned.

All of this can be prevented. States are over reaching. That's a good thing. We may take back the Senate, thus making it impossible for bush to replace a Justice if one steps down. If we take back the WH, we'll really dodge a bullet.

[hfojvt]

3. does it make any difference in practical terms?

If Roe vs. Wade is over-turned, it does not mean that abortion is unconstitutional - it means that anti-abortion laws are NOT unconstitutional. It is likely that abortion, therefore, that abortion will still be legal in blue states, where probably 75% of the abortions are taking place anyway. Take SD (please). There is currently only one abortion provider - in Sioux Falls, which is practically on the Minnesota border. Planned Parenthood of Sioux Falls can simply set up shop in Valley Springs, Mn and still provide legal abortions for most of the women of SD who want them unless Minnesota suddenly turns red. All it means is another 50 miles of driving. Abortion will still be legal in California, Illinois, and New York - at least if their legislatures and governors are as blue as their Presidential and Senate voting (the names Pataki, Ryan, and Schwarzenegger are echoing in my head now for some reason).

[-..__...]

12. I'm not sure about that.

It depends on which constitutional framework the SCOTUS applies.

If they decide against Roe based on states rights (10th amendment), then abortion would become a red/blue state issue and not an issue to be regulated by the federal government. However, what if they decide that life begins at conception (as the fundies would have us believe), and therefore a fetus is granted "full immunities and privileges" under the 14th amendmnet... basically, a fetus is a US citizen and the interests of the federal government supersede the rights/citizenship of the states.

Another hypotetical... suppose the SCOTUS does rule that abortion rights shall be decided by the states?
Is there any possibility that one state can make a "commerce clause" case that would prohibit traveling from a ban state to a no ban state?

I'm also not entirely certain that there is a clear dividing blue state/red state line here.

Certainly there are red states that would like to ban the procedure altogether. There are blue states that while they might not take the extreme approach, they could foreseeabley place certain restrictions... partial-birth ban, parental notification, etc.

[Love Bug]

20. They won't grant a fetus full personhood because then every woman

who miscarries will then be able to claim that fetus on that year's taxes as a dependent. When it comes to the Feds, it always boils down to money.

[Bridget Burke]

19. Yes--but only for some women.

They are the ones for whom a long drive is not practical. If their states already have few abortion clinics, they are already suffering.

But these are POOR. And they are WOMEN. Who live in RED STATES. So--let's look at the political points we can win!

[Donna Zen]

4. Roe was settled on privacy

thus, you are losing your privacy. We've lost the courts.

[Greyhound]

5. I'm tellin ya, The United States of Canada and Jesusland (Giliad).

It's coming. Maybe I am a :tinfoilhat:, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong. :shrug:

[DemGirl7]

6. I feel that Roe v. Wade will be no more pretty soon, sadly

I mean, all one has to do is to open up their eyes and look at the political climate of the country. The Republicans are in almost if not in total control of the gov't and the fundies have made a nice home in the party. The right wing whackos are in charge of the gov't, from the executive, both houses of congress, and Federal Judiciary(including the Supreme Court). The two most coservative Justices on the Supreme Court, Scalia & Thomas, are just itching to overturn Roe as we speak, and they are they are the make & model for every new judge that is appointed to the Supreme Court, or the Federal Judiciary as a whole under the Republican party controlled gov't. And with rumors of Justice Stevens retiring soon, and probably within the time for * to appoint another Scalia/Thomas clone to the High Court, Roe's days are growing shorter. This makes me as a young woman very concerned. :scared:

[sellitman]

7. But once they succeed won't that be....

the end of the Republican party? Won't the masses finally freak out and see the madness foisted upon the country? When the coat hanger deaths are once again in the news won't that make the non-voters rebel? Maybe this is the beginning of the end for THEM, not Roe-vs Wade? Comments?

[DemGirl7]

9. maybe the public will freak out and rebel, but...

yet again look at all the crap that has gone on for the last 5 1/2 years, and the public hasn't done anything about it. Take for example, that we have had 2-3 stolen elections, yet there are many within the public that still refuse to believe it. And it won't be the end of the Republican Party, because there will always be people out there that will fall for their distorted view of reality, and they would push even futher to make society perfect in their terms. But there is hope, that the public will rebel, since it does seem that they are now just waking from their sleep.

[k_jerome]

10. no. nt.

[taps]

11. I don't think so

If it was overturned the Republicans can't use it politically anymore. I think they just say they want it overturned but not really happen.

[obxhead]

16. I agree wholeheartedly.....

They ALWAYS turn to abortion and heyzues when real issues heat up. I'm sure the justices could find a way to worm out of it with another timely resignation.

[Nomen Tuum]

13. Roe is effectively gone in 80% of the country

Alito and Roberts can't wait to do their Opus Dei masters will and kill it off.

[OzarkDem]

14. We're getting ready to invade Iran

This is a distraction and one we're going to have to set aside for the time being.

We really need to refocus public attention to Bush's dangerous foreign policy and our crumbling economy.

[ComerPerro]

15. Nope. It will never go away. And these states will be punished

and their decisions will be stricken down.

The legislation wasn't ever for the purpose of making abortion illegal.

It is a ploy, a sacrificial lamb, offered up to be slaughtered.

that way, conservatives can keep feeling like opressed, persecuted victims of activist judges.



Right now, for the Administration to seize total control, they will either need to stack the court entirely or just generate enough "moral outrage" to have it eliminated entirely.

And, no matter how pathetic of a sycophant Bush's cronies he places on the court may be, they can never be trusted to go with him 100% of the time.

So, as a means to an end, its easier for BushCo to get total control by having the court eliminated.

So, this phase is laying the groundwork.

[depakid]

17. Now, why would the Naral spokesperson

call the far right "pro-life?" rather than "anti-abortion" or better yet- "anti-choice?"

Was she misquoted- or just plain stupid?

Sometimes it's no wonder why our side loses....

[Skittles]

18. WHY is Nancy using the misnomer "PRO-LIFE"

these sanctimonious pieces of SHIT are *ANYTHING* but PRO-LIFE

[mikeanike]

21. In terms of having federal protection, yes

Any state can preempt the federal law on this and simply allow it in their state. What your going to see is an erosion of right that is slow and painful to watch.

[Sawkrates]

22. Not yet (but it could be coming...)

The four liberal justices won't vote to overturn ROE, my knee jerk reaction is that Kennedy probably won't, and I suspect that Roberts has too much respect for precident to shoot down a decision that's been upheld 38 odd times (though I could be very, very wrong on that.) I could see us winning 5-4 or perhaps even 6-3 if the SD/Miss laws come before the court.

Of course the big worry is that Stevens will go. Just pray that he makes it through the end of the year, and that we take back the Senate. This is definitely the time to go out to any woman who isn't already a strong democrat but cares out her abortion rights and tell her right off that if the Republicans stay in power you can kiss Roe v Wade goodbye at some point.