In the leaked draft of the Supreme Court decision regarding abortion law, Justice Samuel Alito stated that “abortion is not deeply rooted in the nation’s history or traditions.” This is not factually correct, and this claim needs to be called out every time it comes up. The majority of state laws in effect in the 20th century were written after the Civil War, as noted in the Roe vs. Wade decision. At the time of the writing of the Constitution, there were few restrictions on abortion, certainly not during the 1st trimester.
He also implies that because there is no reference to abortion in the Constitution, there is no constitutional right to it. This also relies on the claim that the 14th Amendment does not guarantee a right to privacy.
There is no reference to corporations in the Constitution either, but he and the Republican majority had no problem deciding that corporations have a right to free speech, even though they are not citizens as defined in the Constitution.
It is also interesting that he stated that this decision would be for this case only and could not be used as precedent for any other issue — just like the decision to stop Florida from recounting ballots made George W. Bush president. Stating that a decision may not be used as precedent should be a red flag.
Many people claim the authority of the Bible for their opposition to abortion, picking and choosing which passages are authoritative or more important. There is no reference to abortion in the Bible, but there are references to adultery and divorce. We don’t have to look very far to know which public figures would be most opposed to those religious prohibitions.
But in any case, making a religious argument the basis for interpreting the Constitution is allowing government to establish religion, which is expressly prohibited in the Constitution. We have only to look at the history of religious domination in government — from the Spanish Inquisition to the Taliban in Afghanistan — to see the mischief that occurs when there is no separation between church and state.
The so-called religious right also quotes Leviticus passages against sodomy a lot, which was also illegal in some states within my lifetime. Those who worry about same-sex marriage are right to feel threatened.
I also wanted to comment on the statement that “the party of Lincoln and Eisenhower has sunk.” This so-called Republican Party is not the party of Lincoln and Eisenhower, but the party of Trump, and there is nothing Republican about it.
The Constitution was written to provide a framework to define how laws would be written, how they would be enforced, and how disputes about laws would be settled — a republic. It was not written to make laws.
The Bill of Rights was written to prevent the government from encroaching upon the rights of individuals to make personal decisions — specifically to protect minorities. Subsequent amendments were written to expand individual liberties (except the disastrous prohibition on alcohol), not restrict them.
I must make a comment about the new Supreme Court justice-to-be: I listened to the hearings, and it is very evident that the three most antagonistic senators do not want a judge who judges each case impartially on the merits, but a political hack like those chosen from the partisan political Federalist Society list. Ketanji Brown Jackson is the most qualified person ever to be presented to the court. Her lack of a judicial philosophy (i.e. preconceived agenda) is a definite plus. It is impossible from her hearings or her written judicial opinions to know how she would rule in any particular future case.
I pray that President Biden has a nominee ready to propose immediately if another vacancy occurs during his term. He has made a truly admirable choice to succeed an incredible woman.
Judith Truesdell lives in Shelburne.