With The Radical Left Already Acting Out And Torching Pro-Life Offices, Burning Down Their Own Cities And Communities Is Next By Betty Louise Tyndale of the Blue State Conservative for All News Pipeline
Brace For Violence, Chaos And Hysteria
Once again the loud-mouth, blow-hard radical left is up in arms about the potential overturning of Roe v. Wade triggered by the egregious leak of the first draft of a SCOTUS majority opinion written by Justice Alito after the court upheld a law passed in Mississippi banning abortions in the state after 15 weeks gestation.
While the opinion has the appearance of overturning Roe v. Wade, it’s more a measure to define what about Roe v. Wade did not meet Supreme Court criteria for considering a case on constitutional grounds and thus invalidates it.
In fact, the case was sloppily prosecuted and the Constitution made to “say” things it did not say. Beyond this, it allowed the court to take upon itself a legislative function (i.e., the making of laws) that, under the Constitution, it does not possess.
The adored Ruth Bader Ginsburg was herself a critic of the decision and its legitimacy as a law. To paraphrase one of Tony Fauci’s favorite expressions—it’s about the law!
Besides the legal shenanigans and the dog-and-pony show put on by Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee, the lawyers who made Roe v. Wade their great claim to fame—to make abortion the law of the land—a little known fact is that Jane Doe was a hapless, poorly educated woman by the name of Norma McCorvey who was illegitimately pregnant.
She was also the perfect foil for Weddington and Coffee who were looking for a woman with insufficient education and blunted intellect who could be easily manipulated and thereby used, all the way up to The Supreme Court, to make abortion legal.
After McCorvey, who went on to bear her child and never benefited from the Roe v. Wade decision, learned how she’d been exploited by Weddington and Coffee, she became an outspoken, even eloquent, opponent of abortion.
So why divulge this draft opinion to the public? A commentator on Fox News has suggested “By leaking this whole opinion. . . It [seems to be] a blatant attempt to do three things. . . One, to delegitimize the court; two, to try to get Congress to do something before the opinion; three, to intimidate the justices.”
Delegitimizing the court and intimidating the justices are the foulest and most reprehensible of reasons because they end up holding the court hostage to public opinion. They also politicize the court, which neither Democrat nor Republican should desire. SCOTUS is, as the framers of the Constitution intended it to be, the last bastion of unbiased and fair justice in our land.
These past few years bear witness to what happens when basic American rights (freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, a fair and timely trial, and the sanctity of the electoral process) come under attack and are sucked dry of their once-glorious vigor.
In this regard, I believe that the commentator on Fox left out a fourth, even more vile, more unconscionable, reason for leaking the document, which is to shred the sanctity of the Constitution and to usurp the role of the court as the last bastion of a free and democratic state. In other words: let anarchy and tyranny be the “law” of the land.