Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Well, Roe is poorly written, and could be overturned, but the Right has stupidly made Roe a referendum on whether there's a right to privacy in the Constitution. They should stress the States Rights side of the anti-Roe argument, and argue that there is a right to privacy, but that abortion is not a privacy issue - that it is a public policy issue which states should have the right to regulate. By arguing against a right to privacy, the Right has made overturning Roe harder. NOBODY wants to be seen as the judge or party which hastened a decision taking away our right to privacy.
BTW, I was at a dinner a few days back where a constitutional scholar stated matter-of-factly "There is a right to privacy in the Constitution." He said it as though it wasn't even up for debate.
|
I think there are a few justices who think Roe is a bad decision but here I think the practical consequnces outweigh constitutional law. This court would never have decided that way in the first place, but I don't think the current court or any future court is going to overturn it. I don't think the justices are going to overturn it because it would rip this country apart. There would be riots and abortion would become the number one issue in this country.
I think the decision is like Miranda (although I would still like to see Miranda overturned). No one is willing to plunge into that much of an unknown to overturn it.
