Minutes ago, the Supreme Court overturned the nearly 50-year precedent set by Roe v. Wade in 1973 with their ruling in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
The decision is 6-3, with John Roberts joining the conservative majority.
Justice Samuel Alito issued the court’s majority opinion. He was joined by Justices Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Barrett.
Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan made up the dissent.
Justice Alito writes the following in his landmark opinion:
The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.
The opinion continues with the following:
The critical question is whether the Constitution, properly understood, confers a right to obtain an abortion. Casey’s controlling opinion skipped over that question and reaffirmed Roe solely on the basis of stare decisis. A proper application of stare decisis, however, requires an assessment of the strength of the grounds on which Roe
was based. The Court, therefore, turns to the question that the Casey plurality did not consider.First, the Court reviews the standard that the Court’s cases have used to determine whether the Fourteenth Amendment’s reference to “liberty” protects a particular right. The Constitution makes no express reference to a right to obtain an abortion, but several constitutional provisions have been offered as potential homes for an implicit constitutional right. Roe held that the abortion right is part of a right to privacy that springs from the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
The Casey Court grounded its decision solely on the theory that the right to obtain an abortion is part of the “liberty” protected by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Others have suggested that support can
be found in the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, but that theory is squarely foreclosed by the Court’s precedents, which establish that a State’s regulation of abortion is not a sex-based classification and is thus not subject to the heightened scrutiny that applies to such classifications.Rather, regulations and prohibitions of abortion are governed by the same standard of review as other health and safety measures.
Next, the Court examines whether the right to obtain an abortion is rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition and whether it is an essential component of “ordered liberty.”
The Court finds that the right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition. The underlying theory on which Casey rested—that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause provides substantive, as well as procedural, protection for “liberty”—has long been controversial.
The Court’s decisions have held that the Due Process Clause protects two categories of substantive rights—those rights guaranteed by the first eight Amendments to the Constitution and those rights deemed fundamental that are not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. In deciding whether a right falls into either of these categories, the question is whether the right is “deeply rooted in [our] history and tradition” and whether it is essential to this Nation’s “scheme of ordered liberty.” Timbs v. Indiana, 586 U. S. The term “liberty” alone provides little guidance.
Thus, historical inquiries are essential whenever the Court is asked to recognize a new component of the “liberty” interest protected by the Due Process Clause. In interpreting what is meant by “liberty,” the
Court must guard against the natural human tendency to confuse what the Fourteenth Amendment protects with the Court’s own ardent views about the liberty that Americans should enjoy.For this reason, the Court has been “reluctant” to recognize rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution.
Mary Margaret Olohan – D.C. Correspondent for the Daily Wire – was live at the steps of the Supreme Court and captured the reactions of pro-abortion activists in a series of videos shared via Twitter.
Abortion activists react to the overturn of Roe
Originally tweeted by Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) on June 24, 2022.
The impact of this decision will be monumental. It remains to be seen what further actions the Left will take to show how they feel about the result.
Lila Rose – President of the pro-life group Live Action – tweeted yesterday that Catholic Churches and pregnancy centers were told to expect “extreme violence” in the wake of the decision.
Although tragic, continued violence against these groups would not be surprising as it would follow the trend of events that have taken place after the Dobbs decision was leaked earlier this year.
As previously reported, there have been over 4o instances of violence and vandalism against pro-life individuals and groups.
(RELATED: Violence Targeting Pro-Life Movement & Pregnancy Centers on the Rise)
Justices Barrett and Kavanaugh have been personally targeted at their homes.
Protesters marched outside of Justice Barrett’s house last week, covered in blood and holding signs bearing slogans such as “abortion on demand and without apology.”
(RELATED: Protestors Covered In Fake Blood Harassed Amy Coney Barrett’s Home)
Victoria Snitsar Churchill is a proud immigrant and naturalized U.S. citizen with a decade of experience in grassroots politics and community organizing.
Her writing has been featured in many online publications, including Campus Reform, The Daily Torch and The Daily Signal.
As an undergraduate at the University of Kansas, Victoria appeared in media outlets such as CBS News, TIME Magazine, The Washington Post Magazine, The Blaze and NRATV.
Victoria is also a former NCAA D1 student-athlete and Kansas College Republicans State Chair.
After moving eleven times in six years, Victoria resides in Arlington, Virginia and enjoys overpriced brunch on Sundays with her husband.
VICTORY
End the Genocide: 1973-2022
Most Planned Parenthood centers Near Minority Neighborhoods nationwide
States should now allow abortion to when the fetus reaches 21 years old. After all it is still part of the birthing persons body. Some may object, then maybe 18 years old.
WOW! Now that SCOTUS has ruled against roe-v-wade we can expect riots and destruction to some of our cities from all the left wing radical groups, along with the criminal elements like blm and antifa taking advantage of the situation. Now we need to use this election in November, and the one in November of 2024 ,to purge all the left wing democrats from our government while we still have a chance to do that and hopefully be able to keep our constitutional republic.
People are extremely stupid about abortion. The woman started the process by getting pregnant except in the case of rape and incest.
No, their protests will be “mostly peaceful” – IN A PIG’S EYE!!!
Right you are, Guys! We should eliminate as many Leftists as possible during each & every election cycle. In the meantime, let’s celbrate a wonderful pro American, pro life, pro freedom to be born decision by the six Conservative justices.
The radical pro killing supporters refuse to acknowledge that a human being in the womb, also has inalienable rights to liberty and the pursuit of a happy LIFE.
Wow, sanity from SCOTUS! Who’d of thought. Now there should not be any more funding to “planned parenthood” or any other murdering group by tax-payer dollars!!!
I agree whole heatedly with the above statements, Amen
Amen!!! Great comments.
Abortions are NOT in the constitution as a right. Now lazy Americans will have to get off their butt’s and vote if they want or do not want abortions in their states. A great day in America. It is a woman’s body to do with as they want.
It is not surprising that pro-abortion activists should turn to violence in their efforts to protect their “right” to commit murder. Violent people are going to be violent.
This violence somewhat contradicts the narrative that the left has been pushing for years, that if we only had socialism everywhere, the world would be a kinder, gentler place. Socialists love using violence to intimidate people into accepting their rule; how kind and gentle can socialism possibly be when it is imposed through violent means?
It seems this platform is like all the rest of the internet platforms!
Watch the protests, riots and burnings began. Care to take any bets as to if any involved will end up in the same prison as the Jan. 6th as political prisoners?
Another funding source for the Dems bites the dust. Just like they are attacking the Republican funding from fossil fuels.
KEEPING THIS IN PROPER PERSPECTIVE
FIRST, when did Yahweh (God of the Bible and the Only Lawgiver, per Isaiah 33:22 & James 4:12) turn His moral determinations for in utero infanticide, sodomite “marriages,” and a myriad of other moral issues, over to a five to four majority of fickle finite men to decide, with all decisions susceptible to being overturned by a future court.
ANSWER: If you’re a proponent of the U.S. Constitution, you’re compelled to declare that this occurred in 1787 when a cadre of fickle finite theistic rationalists (aka constitutional framers) replaced Yahweh with We the People as America’s Sovereign and thus His unchanging moral law (including Exodus 20:13, 21:22-23, & Deuteronomy 27:25) with their own capricious man-made traditions (aka the biblically seditious Constitution) as the supreme law of the land.
SECOND, per the Tenth Amendment, this decision simply turns the decision to slaughter infants in their mothers’ wombs over to the states to decide, the majority of which will most likely vote to continue the practice.
Returning power (via Amendment 10) to the states is NOT the answer for our country. When biblical standards are rejected, state governments are just as wicked as is the federal government.
Our only answer is a return to Yahweh the God of the Bible as America’s Sovereign, His Son as the Savior of the remnant, and His morality as found in His perfect law and altogether righteous judgments (Psalm 19:7-9) as government and society’s ethical standard.
For more, see Chapter 3 “The Preamble: We the People vs. Yahweh” of free online book “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at Bible versus Constitution dot org. Click on the top entry on our Online Book page and scroll down to Chapter 3.
Then Chapter 4 “Article 1: Legislative Usurpation.”
Then Chapter 6 “Article 3: Judicial Usurpation.”
Then Chapter 9 “Article 6: The Supreme Law of the Land.” Find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey on the right-hand sidebar and receive a free copy of the 85-page “Primer” of “BL vs. USC.”
Then Chapter 19 “Amendment 10: Counterfeit Powers.”
Find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the sidebar and receive a free copy of the 85-page “Primer” of “BL vs. USC.”
Your right Ted !…The only way that the laws of this land is going to mean anything, is if we give it over to the heavenly Father…Many that have fallen away from his word, and they will be held accountable for their own indiscretioin for not obeying the sacred rules of Gods creation…HUMAN LIFE!