Fox Nation digs into Roe v. Wade and the controversial draft opinion that could overturn the 50-year precedent

Amid the controversy surrounding Justice Samuel Alito’s leaked draft opinion, Fox Nation is digging into the significance of overturning the high court’s precedent, bringing the notorious 1973 decision along with discussions of privacy rights and equal protection to the fore once again.

Demonstrators gather in front of the U.S. Supreme Court as the justices hear arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, a case about a Mississippi law that bans most abortions after 15 weke, op Desember 01, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Demonstrators gather in front of the U.S. Supreme Court as the justices hear arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, a case about a Mississippi law that bans most abortions after 15 weke, op Desember 01, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) (GETTY)

In ‘Fox Nation 101: Overturning Roe v. Wade,’ New York University Law School professor Richard Epstein “stel[s] the historical stagewhile depicting the decades-long circle of how the decision came to be and how it could possibly be rescinded.

This is a strange moment for me. I was an academic in 1973 when ‘Roe v. Wade’ came down,” hy het gesê, “And I’m an academic now, 49 jare later, when the decision stands to be overturned.

SUPREME COURT’S MAJORITY VOTE TO OVERTURN ROE REMAINS INTACT: VERSLAG

Epstein begins by reflecting on a time when the law had been considered settled, that abortion was written off as an issue that weighed on state governments and federal intervention was not yet considered.

When theRoecase came for oral argument, Harry Blackmun [former associate justice of the Supreme Court] had other ideas,” hy het gesê.

So the argument starts to go forward, and all of a sudden we discover that there are new constitutional rights that were brewing and now have got their fruition in ‘Roe.'

The Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C.

The Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. (AP Foto / J. Scott Applewhite, lêer)

He relates back to an earlier and far less controversial Hooggeregshof besluit, “Griswold v. Connecticut,” which established the illegality of withholding contraceptives from married couples in the state of Connecticut, but the decision brought Connecticutin line with every other state in the Union.

The discussion moves on to discuss theshakyfooting forRoe,” including that Justice Blackmun never clearly defined its constitutionality.

What he did is he divided pregnancy into three trimesters. And in the first trimester, in wese, the woman was free to do as she pleased. In the second trimester, there could be sensible medical limitations. And then it turns out in the third trimester, when a woman is virtually delivering, the state has a much greater power,” Epstein said.

Unlike the “Griswold” saak, the popular reaction to theRoedecision was deeply split.

KLIK HIER OM FOX NATION TE KRY

With last week’s leaked draft opinion, the statement rings true. The issue divides just as deeply – if not more deeply – now than ever. Arson against pro-life non-profits, protests outside of regters’ huise and demonstrative displays of disapproval plague American streets in support of preserving the controversial precedent.

As America waits the high court’s final decision, chaos ensues in attempt to sway the justicesopinions and shape the future of federal, judicial authority on abortion rights.

Fox Nasie programme is op aanvraag en vanaf u mobiele toestel-app beskikbaar, maar net vir Fox Nation-intekenare. Gaan na Fox Nation om 'n gratis proeflopie te begin en kyk na die uitgebreide biblioteek van u gunsteling Fox News-persoonlikhede.

Kommentaar gesluit.