Supreme Court ruling on abortion motivated by ‘religious doctrine’ not law: New York Times guest essay

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A New York Times guest essay written by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Linda Greenhouse claimed that the basis on which Roe v. Wade was struck down by the Supreme Court was “religious doctrine”, not constitutional law.

Greenhouse began her article with an illustration of how she organizes her research and work on Supreme Court terms. “My own way of tracking a Supreme Court term is to record each of the term’s decisions on a chart labeled by category: criminal law, administrative law, speeches, federalism, etc.,” she said.

“For this last term, one of my records was of course labeled ‘abortion’ and naturally that’s where I recorded Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the decision that overturned Roe v Wade,” he said. -she adds.

Upon closer examination and in order to prove a point, she said she later realized that “I had put Dobbs in the wrong place. Along with the decision about the praying football coach and the one demanding that Maine subsidize parochial school tuition, Dobbs belongs under ‘religion.'”

AOC REFUSES ‘FAKING’ HANDCUFFS AFTER DETAINED IN SUPREME COURT PROTEST

FILE - Associate Justice Samuel Alito sits during a group photo at the Supreme Court in Washington, April 23, 2021. The Supreme Court has ended constitutional abortion protections that had been in place for nearly 50 years — a decision by his conservative majority to strike down the court's landmark abortion cases.

FILE – Associate Justice Samuel Alito sits during a group photo at the Supreme Court in Washington, April 23, 2021. The Supreme Court has ended constitutional abortion protections that had been in place for nearly 50 years — a decision by his conservative majority to strike down the court’s landmark abortion cases.
((Erin Schaff/The New York Times via AP, pool, file))

Greenhouse immediately jumped on the idea that the conservative-majority court had overturned the “constitutional right to abortion” because Roe was a problematic legal decision. “Does anyone really think this was prompted by the court’s disapproval of the court’s recourse in Roe v. Wade to substantive due process, an interpretation of the 14th Amendment that gives meaning to the word ‘freedom’ in the due process clause?”

She then mocked people who claim that the right to abortion was never written into the Bill of Rights. “Does anyone believe that if only the Constitution had included the word ‘abortion,’ the anti-abortion movement would not have succeeded in gaining political traction?”

And she flatly said, “No one really buys the argument that what was ‘patently wrong’ with Roe v. Wade, to quote the Dobbs majority, was the court’s failure to tick the right analytical boxes.”

Although progressive legal experts, including the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, have criticized the legal status of Roe v. Wade. Ginsburg said Roe v. Wade was a “brutal judicial intervention [that] was difficult to justify and appears to have provoked, not resolved, a conflict. »

Finally, Greenhouse made his central point by stating, “It was not constitutional analysis but religious doctrine that drove opposition to Roe.”

A recent New York Times guest essay argues that Roe was brought down thanks to the judges' religious beliefs.  (Photo credit should read KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI/AFP via Getty Images)

A recent New York Times guest essay argues that Roe was brought down thanks to the judges’ religious beliefs. (Photo credit should read KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI/AFP via Getty Images)

Accelerating the hyperbole, she also said, “And it was the court’s unacknowledged adherence to religious doctrine that turned American women into desperate refugees fleeing their home countries in search of reproductive health care. who, less than a month ago, were theirs by right.”

ROD BLAGOJEVICH WEARS AOC TO ‘DO’ BE HANDCUFFED: ‘WHEN I GET ARRESTED, I GET ARRESTED FOR REAL!’

“Judge Alito has endeavored to portray the majority’s conclusion as the product of pure legal reasoning engaged in by judges standing majestically above the fray of Americans’ “strongly contradictory views” on the “moral question deep “about abortion,” Greenhouse said, saying his calling abortion a “moral issue gives more than the majority members, all five of whom were raised in the Catholic church, would have could have intended”.

Quoting pro-choice minister John Nelson, the author wrote: “Describing his own response to the decision as a ‘fury’, the pastor said the judges, in their ‘concern for the lives of fetuses’, overlooked the “lived experience” of women. . “Showing no respect for a lived experience is immoral,” he wrote.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Greenhouse claimed that in “all these pages” of the court’s opinion of Dobbs, “there are surprisingly few real laws. And women, as I have already observed, are virtually absent. It is in the scattered paragraphs in the opinion that the fetus shines.”

“Recognizing that now is high time to defy that norm, I will take my own modest step and rename Dobbs for the religious case that he is, since nothing else explains it,” Greenhouse proclaimed, concluding. his article.

Protesters gather outside the Supreme Court building after the historic decision to overturn Roe v Wade.

Protesters gather outside the Supreme Court building after the historic decision to overturn Roe v Wade.
(Joshua Comins/Fox News)

Comments are closed.