The Texas law on abortion has been in the news recently and the reporting of it in the MSM has left something to be desired in the way of facts.
First, the fact is that the Supreme Court did not overturn Roe v. Wade or even indicate it would be willing to do so. Instead, the Court rejected an application for an injunction, citing uncertainty regarding whether petitioner had standing, or would prevail if the case were tried – the normal and customary conditions that need to be met for an injunction to be granted.
Though it was sort of fun to watch people running around with their hair on fire since the Court did not do what it has typically done – enjoin it first and ask questions later.
You know, I certainly wish the Court were like the latter when it comes to 9th and 10th amendment questions. We have unadulterated text spelling out that the States and the Peoples’ rights are anything that is not delegated to the Federal government, violations of which just get waved on through so that the States or People must sink untold amounts of resources fighting Federal policies that should not be policies. Yet, we tend to get auto-injunction for select unwritten rights that the Court found somewhere, perhaps written on a bathroom wall, many decades ago.
Because of the 9th and 10th Amendments, Roe v. Wade should never have been. It was a Federal overreach from the get-go. But I didn’t intend to get on a soap box; I can go over Roe later.
In my experience in politics, though now somewhat stale, Roe has always been a divisive issue. For my part, it has everything to do with the ever-expanding scope and reach of Federal policies that, as mentioned earlier, has very little in common with the written word of the Constitution, and Federal Courts that appear to exist to kowtow to Federal whims. A recent example would be Justice Roberts’ finding that the individual mandate in Obama Care did not contain a capitation. What?!
For most others, though, the division has to do with the substance of Roe. Some find it morally repulsive and these people vote. Anecdotally, I’ve met many Republicans who said they were Republicans just because of that issue. For everything else, they leaned more to the left of center bit felt alienated.
And the discourse revolving around Roe in recent years has been no less than offensive, with messaging from the left that had typical Republicans looking like grumpy, misogynistic white men, and all women really to want terminate their pregnancies and must vote that way or we will all be hogtied and put back into the kitchen. It’s ridiculous, the fact that the GOP has recently completed its transformation to being pretty much full of grumpy old white men notwithstanding.
When I think about the political makeup of a place like Texas, it’s easy to see why this is an issue for them, and I wonder how much the center left is buying themselves by picking a fight over this law. Do they really think it is worth stirring up the same old hornet’s nest and solidifying the opposition’s resolve over an overreach when perhaps just letting it go might be the better choice for the Republic.
It’s not as if Texas can do anything about laws in other places. It can’t. If they do not want abortion legal after a fetal heartbeat is detected in the state, let them not have it – and a good portion of Republican energy in Texas could dissipate. At any rate, my opinion of the matter is that declaring a fatwa over abortion and looking like a rabid pro-abortionist isn’t the hill I’d want to die on when the Court isn’t what it used to be, and winning some more important battle could mean the difference between having a Republic or not.
To defeat Trumpism, some sacrifices must be made and this one makes perfect sense to me.