15 Weeks Is Plenty of Time to Abort and 50 Years Is Ample to Abort Roe - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
15 Weeks Is Plenty of Time to Abort and 50 Years Is Ample to Abort Roe
by
Supreme Court on May 5 (Phil Pasquini/Shutterstock.com)

Amid all the hullabaloo over Roe v. Wade, stare decisis, leakage of confidential Supreme Court documents, pro-choice, pro-life, and fetal viability, virtually no one comments on a simple reality: 15 weeks is plenty of time to get an abortion. That is more than three months. A woman contemplating killing a fetus — or, as Joe Biden has said, killing a child — should know by three months whether she is pregnant. Even if she did not manifest personal responsibility when she got pregnant, she legitimately should do so before killing a life.

I am pro-life. I am not a supporter of abortion-on-demand even at ten weeks or at any time after the first 40 days. However, inasmuch as the Mississippi law in Dobbs, which stands to become the new gold standard for American abortions, sets the deadline at 15 weeks, I focus on that time frame. Even the far-left Washington Post reports: “Approximately 93 percent of abortions take place in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — meaning 15-week bans target a small fraction of abortions.”

We live in a world of blatant lies. To listen to Woke responses to the draft Alito opinion in Dobbs, one would think SCOTUS soon will be consigning women to hangers for abortions. Such vicious blatant lies. The reality and truth is that almost all American abortions take place within the first 15 weeks of conception anyway. Beyond that, a woman who has missed her menstrual cycle for three rounds should be able to figure out something needs to be checked if she plans to kill the fetus. Testing for pregnancy never has been easier. The tests are even available over the counter. And, beyond all that, abortions still will be absolutely legal in New York, California, and other blue states until the baby’s head emerges into broad daylight.

It is long overdue for abortion law to catch up with science. As Al Gore would say: the science is settled.

Yes, many among the Woke are too busy to schedule an abortion in between all their pressing other time demands café au la latte, Rachel Maddow, Trevor Noah, and yoga class. However, a human life that takes shape increasingly every day deserves to be spared the pain and suffering of being snuffed out and torn limb from limb. Indeed, the very term “abortion” — rather than “fetus killing” — helps to mask how barbaric the killing is. If only a pregnant woman on an abortion table could watch, unsedated, as the life form in her body is being cut to pieces, the head chopped with a hammer, then the vacuum sucking it all out, she might think twice before the next visit and even regret her present abortion for the rest of her life. Endless nightmares hearing the bloods crying out: “Mommy, help me! Mommy, they are murdering me! And it hurts so horribly, Mommy! Please help me, Mommy!”

And indeed what kind of heartless soul — or soulless heart — reposes in the kind of “medical worker” or “doctor” who makes a career of killing fetuses like that?

But what about the precious role of stare decisis — the concept that judicial precedents should stand untouched so that people know with some certainty what is permitted and what forbidden?

Stare decisis is not inviolate. The Woke do not argue that Dred Scott still should stand, nor that Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896) (approving racially separate-but-equal accommodations) should not have been overturned by Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). When prior rulings are seen to have been vile or barbaric, they are ripe for reversal. Similarly, when science advances, society comes to realize that prior rulings were based on incorrect understandings of facts.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), was decided half a century ago. There was no internet. Elon Musk was marking his second birthday. It would be seven more years until CNN would be founded. There were no Toronto Blue Jays, Seattle Mariners, Colorado Rockies, Florida Marlins, Tampa Bay Rays, or Arizona Diamondbacks. In medicine, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT Scan) diagnostics were not yet in place; they would emerge later in the decade.

When science changes, law has to change. Hammers and vacuum suction devices have not changed much since 1973. However, we now know so much more about the development of a fetus, when it becomes viable, and when it feels pain than we did half a century ago. Of course, it is long overdue for abortion law to catch up with science. As Al Gore would say: the science is settled.

Beyond that, Roe simply was decided improperly. I have been a student of law for three decades, a law professor throughout the latter half of that time. Not only conservatives and religionists but even liberal law scholars (off the record) admit that the Roe opinion is legal baloney. It was based on nothing tangible. The Court majority just made it all up out of thin air, effectively reversing two centuries of American practice. It remains stuff and nonsense.

How often before Dodd has the Supreme Court reversed bad law? Get this: Over the years, stare decisis notwithstanding, SCOTUS has overruled at least one hundred and twenty-eight (count ’em, folks, 128!) prior rulings. Among those, they have overruled cases dealing with the Commerce Clause in Article One of the Constitution, Ex Post Facto law, the Full Faith and Credit Clause of Article Four, the Supremacy Clause of Article Six, a ton of First Amendment and Free Speech precedents (e.g., Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), overruling Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927); Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973), overruling Roth v.United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957); and Janus v. AFSCME, 585 U.S. (2018), recently overruling Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, 431 U.S. 209 (1977)); Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Eighth Amendment, Eleventh Amendment, and Fourteenth Amendment cases; as well as antitrust, habeas, labor, admiralty, contract, and res judicata cases.

Several overrulings have been quite recent. Herrera v. Wyoming, 139 S. Ct. 1686 (2019), overruled Ward v. Race Horse, 163 U.S. 504 (1896), only three years ago. The Woke loved that Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015), overruled Baker v. Nelson, 409 U.S. 810 (1972), seven years ago, thus federally legalizing homosexual marriage. Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013), overruled Harris v. United States, 536 U.S. 545 (2002), ten years ago. Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania, 139 S. Ct. 2162 (2019), overruled Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172 (1985), three years ago. Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, 139 S. Ct. 1485 (2019), overruledNevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410 (1979), three years ago. And Janus v. AFSCME, mentioned above, was decided only four years ago. Thus, despite stare decisis, Supreme Court overrulings are far less rare and far more recent than the liars among the Woke want the public to realize.

Ultimately, the Left — Democrats, mainstream media (same thing), and their allied voices — cannot handle that, for the first time since time immemorial, they do not dominate the Supreme Court. In the past, they always succeeded in intimidating Republican presidents from Eisenhower to Nixon to Reagan to the Bushes to name liberal justices or just relied on some of them to be pure stupid. So Nixon backed down and named liberals after the Woke sliced up G. Harrold Carswell and Clement Haynsworth, and Reagan backed down after they destroyed Robert Bork. Meanwhile, Bush 41 named David Souter while Bush 43 name John Roberts. As a result, Democrats have owned the Supreme Court for so long that they have used it as a back door for legislating controversial laws. They likewise conducted vicious campaigns, though unsuccessfully, to intimidate and force Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett to withdraw. Despite all, now that conservatives finally have a SCOTUS majority, the Left can’t handle it.

Well, too bad.

And thank you, President Trump.

Read Dov Fischer every Monday and Thursday in The American Spectator (Wednesdays when SCOTUS drafts are leaked) and follow him on Twitter at @DovFischerRabbi. 

To attend any or all of Rav Fischer’s weekly 90-minute live Zoom classes on the Weekly Torah Portion, the Biblical Prophets, the Mishnah, Rambam Mishneh Torah, or Advanced Judaic Texts, send an email to shulstuff@yioc.org (Please note that Rav Fischer’s classes will be on hiatus during May and June).

Dov Fischer
Follow Their Stories:
View More
Rabbi Dov Fischer, Esq., a high-stakes litigation attorney of more than twenty-five years and an adjunct professor of law of more than fifteen years, is rabbi of Young Israel of Orange County, California. His legal career has included serving as Chief Articles Editor of UCLA Law Review, clerking for the Hon. Danny J. Boggs in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, and then litigating at three of America’s most prominent law firms: JonesDay, Akin Gump, and Baker & Hostetler. In his rabbinical career, Rabbi Fischer has served several terms on the Executive Committee of the Rabbinical Council of America, is Senior Rabbinic Fellow at the Coalition for Jewish Values, has been Vice President of Zionist Organization of America, and has served on regional boards of the American Jewish Committee, B’nai Brith Hillel, and several others. His writings on contemporary political issues have appeared over the years in the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times, the Jerusalem Post, National Review, American Greatness, The Weekly Standard, and in Jewish media in American and in Israel. A winner of an American Jurisprudence Award in Professional Legal Ethics, Rabbi Fischer also is the author of two books, including General Sharon’s War Against Time Magazine, which covered the Israeli General’s 1980s landmark libel suit.
Sign Up to receive Our Latest Updates! Register

Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://spectatorworld.com/.

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!