Refusing to block a Texas abortion ban after six weeks of pregnancy, the U.S. Supreme Court remanded objection to the Texas law to the federal courts for injunctive reliefs. Democrats and the liberal press completely misinterpreted the Supreme Court decision using it a the latest excuse for 78-year-old President Joe Biden to back the court or add more than the current nine members. Democrats don’t’s like to play by the rules, instead seek to change the court composition to add more liberal justices. But the only thing the Supreme Court did was let the federal circuit and appellate court system to do their jobs evaluating the new Texas law banning abortions after six weeks. Associate Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the 5-4 ruling was unconstitutional. Whether the Texas law is unconstitutional or not, it’s up to the federal courts to figure it out.
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts joined the minority in voting that the Texas law was in fact unconstitutional, not following the appropriate precedent of 1973 Roe v. Wader, forbidding states from passing laws that abridge a women’s right to chose abortion. “The court’s order is stunning,” Sotomayor said, thinking that it would save a lot of time-and-energy to just strike down the Texas law without going with through the usual federal court process. “Presented with an application to enjoin a flagrantly unconstitutional law engineered to prohibit women from exercising their constitutional rights and evade judicial scrutiny, a major of justice have opted to bury their heads in the sand,” Sotomayor said. But Sotomayor knows that the majority decision does not stop opponents from seeking injunctive relieve in the federal courts to overturn the Texas law.
Instead of reporting the High Court’s decision factually, Democrats and the press used the ruling to pressure President Joe Biden into packing the court, finding as many liberal justices as they can to change the court’s conservative-liberal balance. Ruling against an immediate ban the court Supreme Court was “not based on any conclusion about the constitutionality of the Texas law,” the Court said, allowing legal challenges to proceed. It’s unfathomable that Democrats and the press can factually deal with the Supreme Court letting the ordinary federal court mechanism to deal with what looks like an unconstitutional state law. Whatever opportunity former President Donald Trump had to appoint conservative justices, that has nothing to do with yesterday’s ruling that asked opponents to the Texas law to file for injunctive relief in proper channels. Yet the media presentation tells a different story.
Texas new abortion law restricts abortions after six weeks of gestation, a time when some 90% of abortions take place Advocates of Roe v. Wade are outraged that the Supreme Court would give any credibility to the Texas laws when it goes against near 50 years of legal precedent under Roe v. Wade. Roe allowed women control over their own bodies, something elected officials sought to control by driving women into the back alley or foreign countries to get abortions at great risk to their health. Texas new law, and the Supreme Court reaction to it, confuses a number of red states seeking more restrictive abortion laws but knows, at the end of the day, the Supreme Court will rule with established precedent. Democrats and the media were given red meat by the Court to push Biden to pack the court or add four more seats to end the conservative majority.
Whether conservative or liberal justices, they abide by established legal precedent regardless of their individual preferences on controversial topics. Allowing the Texas law to be challenged in the federal courts is the right way of handling the new law, not an edict by the High Court declaring the law unconstitutional. If you listen to Democrats or the press, the High Court has ruled already, backing the constitutionality of the Texas law. Yesterday’s ruling tells all relevant parties to challenge the Texas law in the federal courts. If it can’t be resolved in the circuit or appellate courts, then of course the Supreme Court is the last option. But watching Democrats and the media play the issue out politically shows how dishonest Democrats and media to advance their political agenda. No one on the Supreme Court is deliberately trying to overturn Roe. v. Wade.
Supreme Court is already committed to ruling on an Mississippi abortion ban, challenging directly Roe v. Wade. Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban helps resolve a brazen attempt to overthrow nearly 50 years of legal precedent. Unless Mississippi can show why it’s necessary to toss out Roe v. Wade, even conservative justices aren’t likely to rule in their favor. Texas has brazenly tried to reverse Roe v. Wade without testing any legal precedent. When it comes to Texas’ new abortion law, the federal courts will chew-it-up-and-spit-it-out, regardless of the court’s current conservative makeup. Democrats and the press need to stop the hysteria and accept there’s plenty of safety checks to reverse an unconstitutional laws that doesn’t follow established legal precedent. Packing the court would do nothing by undermine a great Amercian tradition that doesn’t need to be changed.
