4 ms·
The rights provided by the 14th amendment are exactly the issue. Today's ruling does not strike a balance between the rights of the mother and the rights of the
by noelsusman 4y ago
The rights provided by the 14th amendment are exactly the issue. Today's ruling does not strike a balance between the rights of the mother and the rights of the unborn child. It eliminates the rights of the mother.
There is a massive gray area, and Roe/Casey dealt with it just fine. Prohibiting restrictions early on in pregnancy and allowing restrictions later in pregnancy seems like a good solution to the competing interests at play.
- portpecos 4y ago> Today's ruling does not strike a balance between the rights of the mother and the rights of the unborn child. Striking a balance between the rights of a mother and child is not the job of the Judicial branch. That’s a job for the Legislative branch. The court’s job was to determine if the Constitution prohibits the State from making their own state-wide decisions about regulating or permitting abortion.
- noelsusman 4y agoThose aren't mutually exclusive jobs. If you determine that the Constitution does prohibit states from eliminating access to abortion, then you as the court must step in and adjudicate the competing interests between the mother and the unborn child. Balancing competing rights is a huge part of what the courts have always done. Fundamental rights like life and liberty should not be subject to the whims of political majorities in legislative bodies. This is a fundamental pillar of our system of government. It's a big reason why we have a Constitution in the first place.