Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Hedgerow

Home
Evangelical
Politics and Religion
Scholars Argue Roe v. Wade is Actually Un-Constitutional

Scholars Argue Roe v. Wade is Actually Un-Constitutional

Last updated on: January 16, 2020 at 9:23 am by Bethany Blankley

Scholars Argue Roe v. Wade is Actually Un-Constitutional 2020-01-16T09:23:09-05:00 Bethany Blankley

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

On Jan. 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton legalized the procedure of killing a pre-born child in the womb (abortion) or any reason before “fetal viability,” which it loosely defined.

The court stipulated that abortion must be permitted for “health reasons” of the woman—up until birth. Yet its broad definition of “health reasons” essentially allowed for any reason and legalized abortion on demand.

The court’s ruling violated the Constitution on several grounds, legal scholars note. The majority opinion expressed by Justice Harry Blackmun reasoned that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protected a woman’s “liberty,” which included a “right of privacy … broad enough to encompass” her right to have an abortion.

Yet, the court ignored a specific class of people –the unborn– also protected by the Due Process Clause, effectually creating “a constitutional right of some human beings to kill other human beings,” attests University of St. Thomas law professor Michael Stokes Paulsen.

University of Pennsylvania law professor Kermit Roosevelt, who supports legalized abortion, points out: “As a constitutional argument Roe is barely coherent. The Court pulled its fundamental right to choose more or less from the constitutional ether.”

In his dissenting opinion, Justice William Rehnquist wrote, “To reach its result the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment.”

The court’s ruling violated the U.S. Constitution’s most fundamental principle: human equality and the protection of one’s right to live. The Constitution requires that every human life be protected, regardless of age, size, stage of development, or dependency on another human being.

The court also ignored legal jurisprudence and historical context regarding the Fourteenth Amendment. State laws prohibited abortion prior to the Fourteenth Amendment’s adoption in 1868—contrary to Blackmun’s demonstrably false claims.

Constitutional scholar and Yale law professor John Hart Ely wrote:

What is frightening about Roe is that this super-protected right is not inferable from the language of the Constitution, the framers’ thinking respecting the specific problem in issue, any general value derivable from the provisions they included, or the nation’s governmental structure. It is bad because it is bad constitutional law, or rather because it is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be.

The court also created another precedent by striking down state laws as illegal, which had existed in all 50 states for roughly 100 years. These state laws were enacted democratically– decided by voters either through ballot initiatives or elected state legislatures. The court overruled the rightful authority of the people in each of these states—and the other two branches of government did nothing in response.

Against the will of the people, and in defiance of the Constitution, the court created policy based not on the Constitution.

Yet, the Supreme Court is not the ultimate legal authority in America. The court does not have the final word on legal matters: American citizens do. The Founders created separation of powers for a reason: Congress can overrule the Supreme Court as well as the President. States can overrule Congress. Congress and state legislatures determine policy as elected branches of government—elected by the people. And the people (in 1973 and 2015) overwhelmingly support significant restrictions on abortion.

In so doing, the Court legalized the leading cause of murder and human death in America. Since 1973, more than 56 million human beings have been “legally” killed.

The Court in Roe, usurped the authority of the people and made murder, illegal according to the Constitution, legal. The Court not only broke the law but legalized others breaking it as well.

Justice Harry Blackmun

Justice William Rehnquist

Roe v. Wade

separation of powers

women's rights

Previous Post

August 5, 2015

Common Law, U.S. Constitution Criminalized Abortion

Next Post

August 10, 2015 Planned Parenthood’s “Clergy” Advocacy Board: Killing Babies is “God’s Work” [video]

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Christianity Islam politics Sexuality transgender Uncategorized

Select a Month January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 October 2019 September 2019 July 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 June 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 October 2016 July 2016 June 2016 April 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 November 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How many books does the Old Testament have?

Select your answer to see how you score.

51 41 50 39