{"id":1461958,"date":"2022-05-03T11:59:45","date_gmt":"2022-05-03T15:59:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1461958"},"modified":"2022-05-03T11:59:48","modified_gmt":"2022-05-03T15:59:48","slug":"5-key-takeaways-from-the-leaked-majority-opinion-draft-overruling-roe-v-wade","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/5-key-takeaways-from-the-leaked-majority-opinion-draft-overruling-roe-v-wade\/","title":{"rendered":"5 Key Takeaways From The Leaked Majority Opinion Draft Overruling Roe V. Wade"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">26<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2F5-key-takeaways-from-the-leaked-majority-opinion-draft-overruling-roe-v-wade%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1461958&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><div><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/dw-wp-production.imgix.net\/2022\/05\/Roe-v-Wade--scaled.jpg?w=1200&#038;h=800&#038;ixlib=react-9.3.0\" class=\"ff-og-image-inserted\" alt=\"image\" \/><\/div>\n<p><span>On Monday evening, Politico <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.dailywire.com\/news\/shapiro-draft-supreme-court-majority-opinion-leaks-striking-down-roe-v-wade-heres-what-all-of-that-means\"><span>dropped<\/span><\/a><span> a massive leak \u2014 Supreme Court decision before the Court had even officially handed it down. According to the leaked draft, which is 98 pages, the majority opinion held that <\/span><i><span>Roe v. Wade<\/span><\/i><span> \u201cwas egregiously wrong from the start,\u201d effectively overturning the landmark decision that legalized abortion around the country.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The Politico report sent the country into rage, rejoice, and confusion. But what does the leaked initial draft say about abortion going forward, and what does it mean if the court follows through with this decision?\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Here are five takeaways from the leaked majority opinion in <\/span><i><span>Dobbs v. Jackson Women\u2019s Health Organization<\/span><\/i><span>:<\/span><b><\/b><\/p>\n<p><b>1. \u201c<\/b><b><i>Roe<\/i><\/b><b> and <\/b><b><i>Casey<\/i><\/b><b> Must Be Overruled\u201d<\/b><\/p>\n<p><span>Justice Samuel Alito, the author of the draft, states the decision plainly for all to understand: <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> and <\/span><i><span>Casey<\/span><\/i><span> were poor decisions and do not hold up under the scrutiny of the Constitution.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><i><span>Roe v. Wad<\/span><\/i><span>e was the landmark decision in 1973 that struck down Texas state laws criminalizing abortion. <em>Roe<\/em> determined that the Constitution did not allow states to punish abortion, effectively legalizing the practice nationwide. In a 7-2 decision, the justices used the 14th Amendment to argue that a \u201cwoman\u2019s right\u201d to an abortion is protected by her \u201cright to privacy.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><i><span>Planned Parenthood v. Casey<\/span><\/i><span> (1992) was decided nearly 20 years after the <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> decision came down, and in a 5-4 decision, the justices reaffirmed <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> and also set a standard in place to determine if a state set certain requirements on women wanting an abortion. They called the standard the \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.oyez.org\/cases\/1991\/91-744\">undue burden<\/a>,\u201d explaining it as a \u201c<\/span><span>s<\/span><span>ubstantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>In the leaked majority opinion from <\/span><i><span>Dobbs<\/span><\/i><span>, Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito reportedly agree that <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> and <\/span><i><span>Casey<\/span><\/i><span> have no foundation in Constitutional law.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Alito writes, \u201cThe Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely\u2013the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The draft goes on to say that the Due Process Clause \u2013 which guarantees due process of law before the government can take away life, liberty, or property \u2013 does not include \u201csome rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution,\u201d including the \u201cright to privacy.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>On this basis, the majority reasons, <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> and <\/span><i><span>Casey<\/span><\/i><span> cannot stand.\u00a0<\/span><b><\/b><\/p>\n<p><b>2. The Constitution Requires Abortion To Be Decided by the States<\/b><b><\/b><\/p>\n<p><span>Before <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span>, abortion was left up to the states. In 1970, New York legalized the practice, becoming \u201ca magnet for women who wanted to terminate their pregnancies but were barred from doing so where they lived,\u201d as <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2018\/07\/19\/us\/politics\/new-york-abortion-roe-wade-nyt.html\"><span>The New York Times<\/span><\/a><span> put it. Alaska, Hawaii, and Washington also repealed abortion bans between 1967 and 1973. Another 13 states allowed for more abortion exceptions without fully legalizing it.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>After the <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> ruling came down, state laws against abortion became impossible to enforce, but some states have continued to push for abortion bans. Those recent actions on abortion are what led to Monday\u2019s leaked decision, which is expected to be handed out by the Court in the coming months.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>In 2018, Mississippi passed a law banning abortions after the baby reached 15 weeks gestation. The only licensed abortion agency in the state, Jackson Women\u2019s Health Organization, sued. A district court ruled that Mississippi could not enforce a 15-week abortion ban, arguing that the state did not prove a baby has viability at 15 weeks. A U.S. Appeals Court upheld the decision, and the case came before the U.S. Supreme Court in December.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Mississippi is far from the only state seeking to ban some abortions. Eight states, including Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Ohio, South Carolina, and Texas have recently passed heartbeat bills, banning abortions after an unborn baby\u2019s heartbeat can be detected. There are also <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.brookings.edu\/blog\/fixgov\/2022\/04\/12\/america-after-roe-v-wade\/\"><span>26 states<\/span><\/a><span>\u00a0that would likely ban abortions after <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> is overturned. Abortion would still be legal in most cases in the remaining 24 states.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>That is the reality the justices say the Constitution demands. \u201cIt is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people\u2019s elected representatives,\u201d Alito wrote.\u00a0<\/span><b><\/b><\/p>\n<p><b>3. Overturning Precedent\u00a0<\/b><b><\/b><\/p>\n<p><span>In the <\/span><i><span>Dobbs v Jackson<\/span><\/i><span> draft opinion, the Court overrules prior precedent set by <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span>, and Alito notes that \u201cSome of our most important constitutional decisions have overruled prior precedents.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>He points to the infamous decision in <\/span><i><span>Plessy v. Ferguson<\/span><\/i><span>, a case that established the \u201cseparate but equal\u201d treatment of black Americans. \u201cIn <\/span><i><span>Brown v. Board of Education<\/span><\/i><span>, the Court repudiated the \u2018separate but equal\u2019 doctrine, which had allowed States to maintain racially segregated schools and other facilities,\u201d Alito writes. \u201cIn doing so, the Court overruled the infamous decision in <em>Plessy v. Ferguson<\/em> \u2026 along with six other Supreme Court precedents that had applied the separate-but-equal rule.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The majority opinion reminds us that \u201cadherence to precedent is the norm but not an inexorable command.\u201d The precedent set in <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> does not require the Court to uphold the decision, especially when the majority questions its constitutionality.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>\u201c<\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> \u2026 was remarkably loose in its treatment of the constitutional text,\u201d Alito writes. \u201cIt held that the abortion right, which is not mentioned in the Constitution, is part of a right to privacy, which is also not mentioned.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Once again, Alito writes with unmistakable clarity. Neither the right to an abortion nor the right to privacy appears anywhere in the Constitution, so federal law cannot stop a state from prohibiting abortion based on the Constitution.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The Court, in the draft, gets back to the originalist interpretation of the Constitution, making it clear that a legal ruling handed down from the Court cannot be made on the basis of cultural activism but only on Constitutional law.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Alito continues: \u201c<\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> expressed the \u2018feel[ing]\u2019 that the Fourteenth Amendment was the provision that did not work, but its message seemed to be that the abortion right could be found <\/span><i><span>somewhere<\/span><\/i><span> in the Constitution and that specifying its exact location was not of paramount importance.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The <em>Dobbs<\/em> ruling would set a new precedent, changing how abortion will be argued before the Court in the future. The so-called \u201cright to privacy\u201d is not a valid legal argument for the constitutionality of abortion. Abortion supporters who maneuvered their way through arguments in 1973 can no longer rely on their \u201cloose \u2026 treatment of the Constitutional text\u201d to argue for a right to abortion. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><b>4. R<\/b><b><i>oe<\/i><\/b><b> and <\/b><b><i>Casey<\/i><\/b><b> Have Divided the Country<\/b><b><\/b><\/p>\n<p><span>A point easily lost in the bombshell report is the reason these cases have caused so much panic in the first place. Even some liberals will admit <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> and <\/span><i><span>Casey<\/span><\/i><span> were poorly reasoned arguments, with little-to-no basis in the Constitution, and were decided more on political motivations than on Constitutional principles. So it should be no surprise that the decisions led to years of division and hostility between political parties, friends, neighbors, and family.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>\u201c<i>Roe<\/i><\/span><span> and <\/span><i><span>Casey<\/span><\/i><span> have enflamed debate and deepened division,\u201d Alito writes.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>But the draft stresses that the latest decision was not affected by current or future political reactions to the issue. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>\u201cWe cannot allow our decisions to be affected by any extraneous influences such as concern about the public\u2019s reaction to our work,\u201d Alito explains. \u201cWe do not pretend to know how our political system or society will respond to today\u2019s decision overruling <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> and <\/span><i><span>Casey<\/span><\/i><span>. And even if we could foresee what will happen, we would have no authority to let that knowledge influence our decision.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The justices might not know exactly how the country will react to this decision, but everyone has a good idea that the overturning of <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> will have just as much, if not more, of a divisive effect as the original decision.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Not only was <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> a landmark decision in terms of judicial precedent, but it was also a decision that set the table for next decades of the culture wars. Just as <em>Roe<\/em> led to an extreme partisan divide in the past, its reversal will lead to more division.\u00a0<\/span><b><\/b><\/p>\n<p><b>5. There\u2019s a Racial Disparity to Abortion<\/b><b><\/b><\/p>\n<p><span>Justice Alito ventured into even more controversial territory in his draft opinion, as he writes of the early supporters of abortion who favored eugenics, especially as a way to control the black population.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>\u201cSome such supporters have been motivated by a desire to suppress the size of the African American population,\u201d Alito writes. \u201cIt is beyond dispute that <\/span><i><span>Roe<\/span><\/i><span> has had that demographic effect. A highly disproportionate percentage of aborted fetuses are black.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>He is correct in his connection of abortion to racism. In the early 20th Century, some of the most influential abortion advocates, such as Planned Parenthood founder <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.dailywire.com\/news\/planned-parenthood-ny-will-remove-margaret-sangers-name-from-clinic-over-harmful-connections-to-racism-eugenics\"><span>Margaret Sanger<\/span><\/a><span>, also supported eugenics and had ties to racism. Planned Parenthood even removed Sanger\u2019s name from one of their clinic\u2019s after backlash from people pointing out Sanger\u2019s racism.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Statistical evidence also proves abortion\u2019s disproportionate effect on the black community. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>According to a Congressional <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/115\/meeting\/house\/106562\/witnesses\/HHRG-115-JU10-Wstate-ParkerS-20171101-SD001.pdf\"><span>report<\/span><\/a><span> from June 2015, black women made up 36% of all women getting abortions while only making up 14% of \u201cthe childbearing population.\u201d Since 1973, over 19 million black babies have been aborted, meaning around 30% of all aborted babies were black, even though African-Americans make up only 12% of the U.S. population.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Opponents of abortion have long pointed out this harrowing reality. To have the argument written down in a Supreme Court decision cements its importance in history for all to see.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><em>The views expressed in this piece are the author\u2019s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>On Monday evening, Politico dropped a massive leak \u2014 Supreme Court decision before the Court had even officially handed it down. According to the leaked draft, which is 98 pages,<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":324,"featured_media":1481389,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1461958","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1461958","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/324"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1461958"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1461958\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1481389"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1461958"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1461958"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1461958"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}