Home | About | Donate

Will the Supreme Court Overturn Roe v. Wade After All?


Will the Supreme Court Overturn Roe v. Wade After All?

Louise Melling

This piece was originally published in The New York Times.


Why isn’t this making front page news??? The message is clear-----republicans on the Supreme Court (a few including the chief justice) see this as settled law. This is big news. So maybe all the people who use this issue for political purposes on both sides will go away.


I don’t think so. The news part of it was last week and in general, the conclusions seemed to be you couldn’t read much into what the two dissenting conservatives did. They could easily vote in another case to chip away at Roe v Wade quite effectively. And that case will show up on the docket at some point, you can be sure - maybe people who think like me will be surprised, but I still predict abortion which is already quite restricted in certain states will become more restricted in those states. It will remain as it is now in other states indefinitely I would guess.

People who use the Supreme Court appointment argument for LOTE voting on either side are never going away unless they get 7-2 on their side (and then one side might go away for a while).


This is so silly because it should be settled law. So, off the top of my head I will write some future dystopian news----------there are a few men on the Supremes that have daughters about the same age as Dr Ford was when-----well you know. Maybe some men have thought about that
If teenaged girls are raped--------then I think a lot of fathers and other family members will be out with their guns looking for payback.They will no doubt not shoot to kill but aim for a more sensitive area.
If states decided abortions are illegal----why would women live there—maybe soon we would have all male states.
Then of course, there is the case or Lorena Bobbit ( I think I spelled that correctly) who was so insane about the physical abuse she suffered that she cut off the offending member—and then I think the John Wayne Bobbitt guy I am not sure if he had all his parts though but he became a minister after that, I think.
Finally there will be a battle because somehow sperm get a pass and the egg always takes the fall! So really, there should be equal treatment under the law, and if the sperm have trouble following rules- then instead of an ankle bracelet to know where the perpetrator was, the male chastity belt would be Lo-jacked.
So this all sounds completely insane, doesn’t it -----but a person’s sex life should also have equal protection under the law. I am trying to make fun of this stupidity , although I am sure someone will be insulted----but I hope not------because I am trying to make this as silly as possible----but I had no idea that so many Puritans still existed in America, so to those Puritans I say —Mind your own sperm guys—and leave the eggs alone. : )


Robert is smart enough to realize how important it is to keep Roe in play for the troglodytes that vote GOP. Those “wedge issues” are the key to plutocratic rule. Resolving any of them firmly for partisans of either party risks the possibility of the public turning their voting guns onto economic issues.

The reality is that elites like Roe where it is: abortion is largely banned for poor and working class women due to all the restrictions levied against it over the years. Middle and upper class women all have the resources to get what they need if they have to travel to a clinic.

There’s your intersectionality.


Exactly, this is will be back on the docket right after the 2020 elections.


I get your first paragraph - the R side stands to benefit by keeping the issue in play, I hadn’t thought of that. But I don’t really understand what benefit it is to the elites that abortion is largely banned for poor and many working class - the idea is that elites don’t really care about this issue except as a distraction, so would it be any worse for the R elites if the poor did have current access? Wouldn’t that rile up their base even more?

If voters were to turn their guns on economic issues, I suppose I would think that would benefit the D side since I think much of the R support comes from people who are unwilling to compromise on pro-life issues. Is that your assessment? Or are you saying it is really all about protecting elite wealth so even the D elites don’t want to win as they don’t want the potential of higher taxes?


Economics. There are three things that poor people provide this system with: excess labor, soldiers and prisoners. Poor babies are good for business.

While the proof of this being a conscious consideration is marginal, it is a consistently logical position.

Edit: D’s need these wedge issues as much as the GOP and for the same reason: they have no interest in tampering with the neoliberal economic order. Their wealth and power are tied to this system just the same as GOP elites.