Bruen decided that the constitution means what it says and that there is a federal law that guarantees our right to self defense.

Dobbs decided that the constitution means what it says and there is nothing in it that grants a federal “right” to an abortion.

This lead to the humorous situation of people screaming that the states should be able to and at the same time screaming that the states shouldn’t be able to. Often times in the same breath.

When Roe v. Wade was overturned there were a number of trigger laws that went into effect. Arizona had such a law and on Friday it went into efect.

I don’t know what limits the AZ ban puts on abortion, I’m not about to believe anything I read in the media.

Utah’s trigger law, banning abortions in the state, went into effect Friday night after the U.S. Supreme Court announced its reversal of Roe v. Wade, the nearly 50-year-old decision that protected a woman’s right to an abortion. The suit asks the court to declare the state’s abortion ban invalid, alleging that it violates rights given to Utahns in the state’s constitution.
— The Salt Lake Tribune: Planned Parenthood of Utah files suit, asking court to declare state’s abortion ban unconstitutional

This is the way it is suppose to be done. On a state by state basis. I know that NY, MA, CA and a bunch of other liberal states will put abortion till the end of the 4th (not typo) trimester in place. Other places will put bans in place starting at conception. That is the wonder of our Republic. We have the ability to test different ideas politic in small before committing to them in large.

The pro-life battle now moves to the state and local levels. I expect it will be an uphill battle in most places. There will be battles.

Those battles are now happening where it should happen. At the state level.

I will point out that PP immediately went looking for more judges to make a ruling in their favor, having lost the battle with the public. This is still the right way to do it.

Spread the love

By awa

5 thoughts on “Dobbs At Work”
  1. I find the most fascinating (in a “train wreck” kind of way) thing about the abortion debate is that no matter what “rights”, restrictions, or compromises are established, there will always be vocal critics on both sides not happy with it.

    A local radio host was breaking down the numbers the other day. (I don’t remember the exact percentages, so I’m paraphrasing here; bear with me.) The most extreme outliers make up about 20% of the population, split between “ban all abortions” and “allow all abortions”. Most of the rest — about 75% — are fine with abortions being allowed, with some reasonable restrictions (the definition of “reasonable” varying somewhat).

    But if a state were to set a gestational limit (say, 12-15 weeks) that is both pre-viability AND long enough for a woman to know she’s pregnant, make and come to grips with her decision, and carry it out, about 2/3 of everyone would be satisfied with that. Not ecstatic, but satisfied. Critics on one side say 6-8 weeks (common in European nations, which the Leftists love for everything, apparently, except abortions) is too early, and critics on the other side say 20-24 weeks (common in Blue states that haven’t gone full “right up to birth” crazy) is too far along and too close to viability. 12-15 weeks seems to be that sweet spot in the middle that most people can live with.

    But that middle ground is never discussed, because the outliers are SO DAMN LOUD that it feels like an either/or decision in an all-or-nothing conflict.

    SCOTUS sending the issue back to the States is the right call. There is no enumerated right to an abortion, nor is there a prohibition, and therefore the 10th Amendment rules: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. [emphasis mine]

    1. Yep. My thought is, a “natural” limit would be when a fetus would be viable and could survive if born prematurely. There are of course many others; but this is one that can adapt to advances in medical technology (and, by the way, provide an incentive for improving pre- and post-natal care, and research into related areas). But, as you say, the extrema drown out the middle.

  2. It always fascinates me that the near infinite room to find rights within the 10th amendment by its plain reading seems to always be ignored or interpreted otherwise.

Login or register to comment.