News

If the Supreme Court can overturn the Roe v. Wade, Court Can Ban Interracial Marriage

“GOP will turn upside down Roe v. Wadeand that’s just the beginning. “

When I introduced a column with that title last week to my editor, I did not anticipate that we would read an unprecedented leaked manuscript of the Supreme Court opinion that would explicitly denying women the right to abortion — something that has been “set precedent” for half a century.

Well here we are now, thanks to a radical right-wing movement that is totally engaged in a zero-sum game of totalitarianism to achieve minority dominance for leathery Christian men. white by any means necessary.

Next month, the Supreme Court will finally make a decision Dobbs sues Jackson Women’s Health Organization, related to Mississippi law that prohibits abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. A similar law was recently passed in Florida, partly inspired by the Texas heartbeat bill that has spawned draconian copycat bills across the country.

If the Court respects the law, and overturns Roe and Planned Parenthood vs. Caseywhich asserts that the state outlaws most abortions, the ruling will allow right-wing majority in marriage equality and the use of contraception.

By turning upside down Roe and CaseyThe United States will join only three other backward democratic countries in the past thirty years in restricting women’s right to abortion. Meanwhile, 59 countries have expanded access.

The opinions of four men and Justice Amy Coney Barrett would lead to a potentially banning abortion in 26 states. In Texas, for example, a doctor can go to jail for life if they make a abortion on a woman raped by a family member.

In the leaked draft opinion, Justice Alito justified her ruling by claiming abortion is not an unlisted right and that “the Constitution does not mention abortion and has no right to Any such thing is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision.” Yes, same-sex marriage and the right to contraception are also unlisted rights. Draft comments assure us that the reversal Roe shall have no such effect on these other rights. However, the right-wing majority’s own logic is used to demolish Roe, these unlisted permissions do not have any protection. But, hey, moderate Republican Senator Susan Collins trusts these judges, so should we!

Unlike many of my colleagues in the media, I take Republicans by their word. Like helpful James Bond villains, they’ve told us plotlines so far, but many refuse to take them literally and seriously. During Judiciary appointee Ketanji Brown Jackson’s confirmation hearing, Republican senators gave us a preview of their ambitious goals to strip them of their hard-earned rights. I.

Senator John Cornyn tried to make the case Obergefell v. Hodges, legalizing same-sex marriage, was flawed and was an “ordinance” of the Supreme Court. He has an ally in Justice Samuel Alito. In a controversial 2020 speech at the Federation of Confederations, Justice Alito criticized that religious families are clearly the real victims of marriage equality because people like Alito can no longer afford it. says, “that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Until recently, that was the thinking of the vast majority of Americans. Now it is considered obstinate”.

Meanwhile, Senator Marsh Blackburn openly said that she opposes Griswolds v. Connecticut, a landmark decision in 1965 that empowered privacy and paved the way for Roe. Specifically, it allows couples to have the right to purchase and use contraceptives without government restrictions. Of course, Senator Blackburn believes the decision is “unconstitutional.” She was joined by Senator Mike Braun, who went a step further and said he would even be open to overturning. Loving v. Virginia—Interracial marriages are legalized nationwide.

Instead, Braun wanted to let the states decide (because that has happened so wonderfully in the past for Blacks who try to live their lives without fear of violence, harassment, injustice, equality and discrimination).

I wonder how Justice Clarence Thomas, who is married to Ginni Thomas, a white woman, would vote if such a challenge to Love was brought to before him? Maybe he’ll get one for the team.

If all of this sounds odd, well, the idea of Roe overturned. Currently, the Republican Party is banning books nationwide and passing legislation designed to intimidate educators from teaching on diverse and “divisive” topics.

The abolition of major civil rights by the right is now quite possible, and we must be prepared.

Melissa Murray, a legal scholar and professor of law at NYU, agrees with me that Republicans will most likely focus on same-sex marriage and contraception once they’re done. Roe. “The courts are the weapon of the minority,” Murray told me last week, before Justice Alito’s majority opinion was leaked. “Republicans are trying to do in court what they can’t do in totalitarian politics.”

Professor Murray said abolishing marriage equality could be a long-term project – by emphasizing First Amendment rights and religious freedom to create religious conformity and protest. same-sex marriage.

For example, a conservative majority in 2018 ruled in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple on the basis of religious objections. Cases like these would allow religious rights to use the Courts to undermine gay rights. “Once you narrow the space for same-sex couples to exercise their rights, once you normalize that they cannot expect equal treatment, you are well on your way to normalizing other treatment. each other,” says Murray, adding that it only takes about ten to twenty years to engage and mainstream such ideas.

“Republicans complained about the liberal judiciary, until they gained power and used the Courts to invalidate the will of the majority.”

Carlton Larson, professor of Constitutional Law from UC Davis King Hall Law School, believes it’s possible the Supreme Court could overturn Obergefell.

“This Supreme Court is being much more assertive on some issues than I expected; two years ago, I felt pretty confident that Obergefell will not be reversed. Now at least it’s possible,” Larson said, adding that there is some reason to be hopeful. “On balance, I still think it’s pretty unlikely, given the large number of marriages that have been conducted against Obergefelland as a result without any apparent harm to society. “

However, Larson emphasized that Obergefell was decided primarily as a substantive due process opinion, allowing the courts to protect some fundamental rights that had not been accounted for against government intervention.

If the Court’s conservative majority were to resolve to undo the entire stream of due process cases that were essentially illegal, it might not only be Obergefellbut also Griswold and Eisenstadt sues Baird (allowing unmarried persons to have ownership of contraceptives), vice versa.

“I think overturning all the underlying due process cases is a step too far even for this Court, although there may be some judges who will be intrigued by it,” Larson added. Pierce sues the Sisters Association—Which gives parents the right to send their children to private schools — a decision conservatives have (and are) supporting.

Unfortunately, Republicans don’t need to be logically or ethically consistent to reach their end of the game.

For example, Professor Murray said that executive privilege is not a right listed in the Constitution, but Republicans are fine for Trump to exercise privilege to escape responsibility. There’s no mention of qualified immunity in the Constitution, but Republicans give police officers all the qualified immunity they want to escape accountability for their abuses. them — often at the expense of Black communities.

Republicans for national security, until they are okay to openly support a violent uprising and a coup. Republicans support free markets and pro-business speech, unless a company like Disney opposes Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill, and then they’re perfectly fine using their power. government to punish them. Republicans are supposed to be defenders of free speech, unless, of course, the speech threatens them, then they will ban the book.

Republicans complained about the liberal judiciary, until they gained power and used the Courts to invalidate the will of the majority.

When I spoke to Professor Murray last week about the possibility of the majority losing all these hard-earned rights, she was shocked that people didn’t take this threat seriously. “Nobody did anything,” she lamented. “We’re sleeping at the wheel.”

Looks like the leaked comments have finally gotten everyone’s attention. Crowds began gathering last night outside the Supreme Court demanding to protect women’s rights and uphold Roe v. Wade. Democratic Senators Are Publicly Calling for Systematization Roe into a rule by removing the filibusters. With almost 70 percent of the population against inversion RoeDemocrats have a big problem mobilizing their voters and even some independents.

Sometimes it has to get worse for things to get better. At the very least, it forces people to wake up.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/if-the-supreme-court-can-overturn-roe-v-wade-it-can-ban-interracial-marriage?source=articles&via=rss If the Supreme Court can overturn the Roe v. Wade, Court Can Ban Interracial Marriage

Hung

Inter Reviewed is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – admin@interreviewed.com. The content will be deleted within 24 hours.

Related Articles

Back to top button