Biden now want's to codify RvW by suspending the Senate filibuster rule...

Native NV Ducker

Mod-Duck Hunters Forum, Classifieds, and 2 others
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2003
Messages
25,772
Reaction score
14,175
Location
Sula, MT
The Supreme Court doesn't pass laws, it simply rules on them as written.
Yea, this isn't my first rodeo. I understand what the SC does.
It's up to the Feds and States to fight out which level will pass laws allowing or not allowing it.
OK, try to follow me here. Didn't the SC say, in essence, that the abortion issue isn't a Federal issue, not covered (protected or rejected) by the Constitution? It is a State issue.

So, if that is the case, that it is a State Issue, how can the Feds pass a law protecting abortion?
 

Huskermut

Senior Refuge Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2018
Messages
400
Reaction score
728
Location
Nebraska
Yea, this isn't my first rodeo. I understand what the SC does.

OK, try to follow me here. Didn't the SC say, in essence, that the abortion issue isn't a Federal issue, not covered (protected or rejected) by the Constitution? It is a State issue.

So, if that is the case, that it is a State Issue, how can the Feds pass a law protecting abortion?
I get what you're saying but the Court put no restriction on for or against abortion becoming Federal law. As it stands now, states can legislate it how they see fit but the Feds could trump that. Link 1 Link 2 Link 3 They could treat it like slavery and amend the Constitution or do something similar to the National Minimum Drinking Age Act and threaten to withhold federal funding if states don't fall in line, among other things.
 
Last edited:

The_Duck_Master

Elite Refuge Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2004
Messages
10,102
Reaction score
8,862
Location
Salem, Oregon
I get what you're saying but the Court put no restriction on for or against abortion becoming Federal law. As it stands now, states can legislate it how they see fit but the Feds could trump that. Link 1 Link 2 Link 3 They could treat it like slavery and amend the Constitution or do something similar to the National Minimum Drinking Age Act and threaten to withhold federal funding if states don't fall in line, among other things.
And circle gets the square. It's not the same as guns like many here argue because the 2nd specifically protects that right. And it's also not just a state matter.

"... nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;"

The 14th protects life without due process so if congress passes a law stating that the unborn at some point are "a person" or there is a constitutional amendment that does so, abortion can be made illegal.

It can also reasonably be argued that the rights of the unborn are already enshrined in the constitution and the court could ban abortion outright because when the 14th amendment was ratified the majority of states had laws making abortion illegal so they considered that a life guaranteed protection at the time they voted to pass that amendment into law.

The left has a point that banning abortion could deprive someone of liberty but the exact same argument can be made for the life of the unborn. The problem the left must face is that one person's life cannot be the tradeoff for another person's liberty. Life is the essential right that trumps all others.
 

Top