Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Supreme Week While Atlas Shrugs
Supreme Court watchers love this time of year. At least two times (Monday and Thursday) a week towards the end of June, as it wraps up business and adjourns until early October, justices issue the final flurry of decisions. Last week, SCOTUS announced three major decisions involving First (religious expression) and Second Amendment rights. The final decision, on Friday, humbly restored the rule of law and returned the matter of abortion back to the states, where it resided before Roe v. Wade. And the “body autonomy” crowd – “my body, my choice” – is providing to be as inaccurate in their characterizations as they are hysterical. None appear to have actually read the decision.
If only they felt about Covid vaccines as they do terminating unborn human lives.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, in his concurrence with the Court’s 5-4 decision: “This Court. . . does not possess the authority either to declare a constitutional right to abortion or to declare a constitutional prohibition of abortion.”
As usual, some applauded while the usual suspects on The Left did violence to logic, the truth, and elsewhere, including holding Arizona legislators hostage in their capitol building (insurrection?). Supreme Court lawyer and former Obama Acting Solicitor General, Neal Katyal, tweeted this before the decision was rendered.
Even a non-lawyer like me can easily debunk this weird non-sequitur. The Second Amendment unequivocally states that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Meanwhile, as the Supreme Court said this week, there is no right to an abortion in the Constitution, as much as the late Justice Harry Blackman in 1973 invented one in Roe v. Wade. That decision now joins the Supreme Court’s Hall of Shame as one of the four worst SCOTUS decisions that have been overturned, including Dred Scott, Plessy v. Ferguson, and Korematsu.
With geniuses like Katyal arguing before the Supreme Court, it is no wonder that President Obama’s Administration lost so many cases.
While it is true that some states like Oklahoma enacted “trigger laws” that take effect upon Roe’s demise to prohibit abortions with few exceptions, the laws vary. In other states, “pre-Roe” bans returned from the legislative grave. The Dobbs case that SCOTUS used to overturn Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey involved a Mississippi law that allows abortions up to 15 weeks gestation. Twenty-two states will see no change in the ability to access abortion, including California, New York, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, and Illinois. Those 22 states represent more than half our population.
But no matter. Some now want to ignore or abolish the US Supreme Court, including US Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) and noted Constitutional expert, Keith Olbermann. Very insurrection-y.
Now, let’s overturn Filburn v. Wickard. A topic for another day.
The court also told the State of Maine that no, they could not deny the use of school vouchers for religious education. They told New York and six other states that no, they could not deny someone a concealed carry permit because the state didn’t think they needed it. Not your call, the justices told New York, thus preserving your right to self-defense. The decision has no effect in 43 “shall issue” or “constitutional carry” states.
Two questions come to mind. What really changes with these decisions, and what impact will they have on this November’s election?
The answer to both is not as much as Democrats, hysteria aside, want you to believe. Voters’ concerns are focused elsewhere. And contrary to the apparent belief of many on The Left, voters are more knowledgable, sophisticated, and nuanced.
A new Issues & Insights/TIPP poll shows that “while Americans show deep splits over abortion, their opinions about the controversial medical procedure are far more nuanced than media accounts suggest.
“Days prior to the SCOTUS decision, the I&I/TIPP Poll asked Americans what they thought would happen if Roe was overturned, and whether they thought abortion should be legal or illegal.
“A substantial share — 46% — of the 1,310 adults who responded to the online poll (which was taken from June 8-10 and has a margin of error of +/-2.8 percentage points) said that, even if Roe were overturned, abortions would “remain legal in some states of the nation.”
That suggests to me that while abortion may motivate its most hard-core supporters, it is unlikely to have the effect Democratic partisans may hope for.
Worse for Democrats may be this insightful poll from Scott Rasmussen who, unlike any other pollster, asked whether the matter of abortion is best left to the federal government or the states. “Sixty-five percent of voters think abortion laws should be established by voters and their elected representatives. That’s exactly what will happen if Roe is overturned,” Rasmussen said on May 12th.
Of course, with an assist from Justice Thomas’ lone concurrence, Democrats are claiming that now the court is poised to overturn Court decisions over everything from contraception access (Griswold v. Connecticut) to the right to engage in private, consensual sexual acts (Lawrence v. Texas) and . . . wait for it . . . the constitutional right to same-sex marriage (Obergefell v. Hodges). Thomas’ concerns, from this untrained eye, are the court’s failure to address “substantive due process” involving the misapplication of the 14th Amendment’s “equal access” clause to those major decisions. See page 117 of the Dobbs decision for Thomas’ opinion. Apparently, none of the other justices shares his point of view. Or, are saying so.
Thomas has a point. The 14th Amendment was written in the context of slavery and equal access to laws by black Americans. It is frequently used today on nearly every issue. Including abortion, by the way. Forty years ago, pro-life legislators and advocates promoted legislation to provide 14th Amendment protections to the unborn.
Worse, in the minds of hysterical pro-abortion advocates, is that just as soon as Republicans are back in power, they will pass legislation establishing a national ban on abortion. No serious person, Republican or Democrat is either proposing it or believes it could ever pass Congress. It is now enshrined, as it was before 1973, as a state issue. But I’m sure it will make for good fodder in fundraising appeals to gullible left-wing contributors.
But wait! There’s more!
“The Squad” of uber-leftists in the US House, including US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, wants President Biden to build abortion centers on federal lands, and open up Veterans Administration hospitals to abortions. That is so loony that I almost don’t need to respond. I’m sure America’s veterans, who already have to wait weeks and months for appointments, won’t mind waiting a few weeks and months longer so Sandy and crew can get abortions. Free of charge, no doubt.
And perhaps Sandy and her supporters in places like Arizona, Oklahoma, and South Dakota can help open abortion clinics next to, or in casinos on Indian reservations and territories. But she need not worry, since lots of major employers such as JPMorgan, Amazon, Tesla, and Citibank are willing to pay for their employees to travel to places like California to get abortions so they can quickly return to work.
How dystopian is that?
I have a better idea. If you want to establish a constitutional right to abortion, amend the Constitution. Women suffragettes did it over 100 years ago with the enactment of the 19th Amendment, giving them the right to vote. So can you. Get busy. Quit taking shortcuts by trying to turn the Supreme Court into some kind of super-legislature.
Good luck with that.
Another reason that overturning Roe and New York’s stupid “you don’t need a conceal carry permit” law won’t matter much in November’s elections: Voters are focused on other things. Like this.
Voters are hyper-focused not just on the rising cost of gas and groceries, but even their reliance on even the ability to catch a flight for personal travel.
I would know. This week, I flew to Oklahoma to help celebrate my mother’s birthday and visit with family in my native state. As planned, I drove my mom from Oklahoma to her home in central Illinois. But as so many of you have experienced, my plans to fly home were changed when my American Airlines flights were canceled without explanation (they never explain) on less than three hours’ notice, and not due to any adverse weather. Pilots and crews are in short supply or aren’t showing up to work.
I discovered it would be faster and more reliable to drive 800 miles home in my rental car than accept an unreliable rescheduling of my flights. So I drove home. And my story is far from unique. Hundreds if not thousands of flights are being canceled daily, often on less than three hours’ notice. People have been stranded for days waiting for rescheduled flights that may or may not happen. Don’t believe me? Check out this website to see what’s happening on a daily basis.
And forget airlines. If you’re a menstruating “person” or “birthing person” with a newborn in need of infant formula, good luck. Supreme Court decisions are the last thing on your mind.
Ayn Rand’s famous if flawed tome, Atlas Shrugged, is about a future where incompetent corporate elites conspire with their government equals, resulting in frustrated entrepreneurs vanishing into their own world (“Who is John Galt?”). Rand may have been prophetic in many respects. Except for today, it’s not the entrepreneurs who are escaping workforce frustrations. It’s everyday American workers. And even $16 per hour wages at McDonald’s aren’t enticing them back. The result? Workplace vacancies resulted in product and service shortages, including canceled flights. And much more. Nothing and nobody works anymore, it seems. And voters experience it.
Fundamental things are afoot. While the Supreme Court does its part to protect the rule of law and the Constitution, elsewhere, Atlas is shrugging. And that is what has voters’ attention. It certainly has mine.
Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members.
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community
of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.
There are 11 comments.
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
One thing about this flurry of activity from the Supreme Court: I’ve got to stop my usual reading plan and suddenly go into hyper-read mode, trying to rip through literally hundreds of pages of text to stay up with the blue-checkmark crowd. I hear pundits and experts pontificating just hours after a decision is released. Where did these people learn to read so fast?
I have a book called “How to Read Better and Faster”, and I’ve tried very hard to use it to speed up my capability. It lasted for a time, but I’m back to going through texts at the same plodding rate I’ve had all my life.
Great post. A tour de force.
Their secret is they don’t actually read anything, they just wait for the talking points to be distributed.
To put things into perspective, since 1973, an estimated 63,000 Americans have been dismembered, placed in a stainless steel pan, their organs harvested and sold to the highest bidder. Where would the US economy be if half those people grew up, voted and became part of the workforce?
I think you’re missing some zeroes on that number, Doug.
Doesn’t matter if it passes Congress. Dobbs just ruled the Constitution is silent on abortion, therefore the Federal government has no power over it either way. So no Federal law either “enshrining” or “banning” it will pass muster.
The commerce power may permit such a federal law. This has already been mentioned by SCOTUS in the partial birth abortion case, which upheld a federal ban.
Wickard v Fillburn should be next.
I do not think this is right. They just said the constitution does not protect or create the right. They are not saying the feds can not restrict or expand in via the legislative progress.
I am disappointed that this comment doesn’t have a thousand likes already.
Atlas Shrugged flawed? Be still my heart. OK, she couldnt write a love scene to save her life, but….