Uproar over a Draft
The big news this week of course is that a May 2 article in Politico had a scoop: a leaked February 10 draft of a proposed opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson. It says that “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” and explicitly overturns Roe and Casey. It makes a good case for why.
It isn’t the final draft at all. Deliberations are in process and the outcome could be different. But it’s looking hopeful that a full-fledged overturn might be in the offing.
We’ll always need to remember, of course, that while overturning Roe is a tangible goal, it never was the end goal.
Making abortion unthinkable (along with all other forms of killing human beings) is the end goal. Removing Roe is removing a major obstacle, which allows us to more effectively get to work.
A major part of that work is alleviating the poverty, racism, domestic violence, and sexual violence which, along with being wrong in themselves, are among the root causes of abortion. Most importantly, we must get rid of the idea of violence as a problem-solver.
See, and share with others:
∞ Our website project, The Price of Roe
∞ Our blog post, Our Experience with Overturning Terrible Court Decisions
∞ Aimee Murphy's RI blog post, After Roe: A World Beyond Abortion
∞ And be on the lookout for our friends at Rehumanize International and Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising (PAAU), who are doing a good job of getting their stereotype-breaking signs into press coverage – including the original Politico article.
Aída Chávez is a reporter with The Nation.
Another Possible Referendum Pops Up Because of the Draft
On the flip side, referendums for state constitutional amendments saying there is not a right to abortion are already on the ballot in Kansas this August and Kentucky this November. Pennsylvania and Iowa have them in the works for later years.
Our Latest Blog Post
Julia Smucker gives a list of Threats to the Unborn Beyond Abortion – lack of adequate nutrition and health care, maternal stress, police brutality, war, toxins, domestic violence, gun violence, and mistreatment of pregnant inmates and detainees.
Quotation of the Week
Leaked February 10 Preliminary Draft in Dobbs v. Jackson
Alito is not a consistent-lifer, but we often quote other people who make good consistent-life points.
And if viability is meant to mark a line having universal moral significance, can it be that a fetus that is viable in a big city in the United States has a privileged moral status not enjoyed by an identical fetus in a remote area of a poor country?
Page 30, Footnote 41 (citations removed)
Other amicus briefs present arguments about the motives or proponents of liberal access to abortion. They note that some such supporters have been motivated by a desire to suppress the size of the African American population . . . And it is beyond dispute that Roe has had that demographic effect. A highly disproportionate percentage of aborted fetuses are black . . . For our part, we do not question the motives of either those who have supported [or] those who have opposed laws restricting abortions.