| Society
Ramifications of Overturning Roe: the Backwardness of Originalism
Roe v. Wade’s overturning means more than just clamping down on the most fundamental rights of women; it represents a threat to many of our most essential freedoms.
By Nicholas Just and Tyler Tallamante, 24 June, 2022
Image Credit: Gemunu Amarasinghe/AP
Today, the Supreme Court handed down the verdict in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturns Roe v. Wade. Much time has been spent since the case’s debut debating and discussing whether abortion is murder and whether it should be banned.
Anger and outrage can be felt across the country as for the third day in a row, the Supreme Court has issued verdicts that disagree with the majority national opinion. In this essay, we wish not to give our own two cents on whether abortion should or should not be legal as we and many other biological males have recognized that our opinion does not mean much to this conversation.
Instead, we’re going to discuss the ramifications of Roe v. Wade being overturned.
As of right now, 13 states have made abortion illegal with what are known as trigger laws. However, these laws are blocked by the Supreme Court of 1973 preceding Roe vs. Wade. Overturning this precedent triggers these laws in these states immediately ban abortion.
Other states have some restrictions on abortion already on the books for when Roe is overturned. Currently, women in the United States can get abortions up until about 24 weeks, when the now infant is considered viable because the infant could realistically be independent of the mother’s body.
These laws are only one of the tangible consequences of the actions of the Supreme Court, in a country where a 61% majority of Americans today say abortion should be legal in all or most cases.
The precedent set by the supreme court also now puts other rights at risk, as the logic used to overturn Roe vs. Wade can be used to attack other rights.
Roe was overturned despite many Supreme Court judges, including many that voted to overturn, having stated that it was a settled precedent. Preston Keres / Wikipedia Commons
The first draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito states that the original opinion on Roe vs Wade was wrong because, “no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely—the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
This means that the government now can and will take away our freedoms at will. We are already beginning to see our 14th amendment protections ripped away by the same court using the similar logic of originalism.
Originalism, a framework for interpreting the law, asserts that rights not explicitly in the original constitution should not be amendments or rights. This train of thought poses a serious threat to many freedoms and could be applied to every amendment because the entire point of an amendment is to change the constitution.
In other words, the Supreme Court is using logic that could realistically threaten the 2nd amendment to carry out their anti-woman and anti-working class, right-wing agenda. The 2nd amendment however is not in real danger because this is a partisan conflict, not one of Originalism.
This disproportionately affects impoverished people. Those involved with this decision can use loopholes like fleeing states with active abortion bans, something many Americans can not afford. The law only
In terms of real-world ramifications, this decision is terrifying. Banning and even criminalizing abortion does not stop people from getting abortions, it just forces people to get unsafe abortions. A study by Abortion Worldwide 2017 found that the more restrictive the legal setting, the higher the proportion of least safe abortions.
This action may also make it harder for people to obtain contraceptives. Emergency birth control, known as Plan B, technically acts after insemination and may be considered abortion and not contraception by some legislatures.
Griswold v. Connecticut: the case that made state bans on contraceptives unconstitutional, used the same justification (14th amendment, right to privacy) as Roe v. Wade, a justification that is apparently “not implicitly protected within the constitution”.
Across the country, many protests have already been mobilized to oppose this heinous act. Young Patriots Magazine
Many state legislatures are going to great lengths to appeal to the radical, evangelical, pro-abstinence “Pro-Lifers”, Going as far as to even discuss banning contraceptives. Contraceptives are a crucial part of stopping unwelcome pregnancies and should be made more readily available if we actually want to curb abortion rates.
The Supreme Court entertaining cases like Dobbs v. Jackson puts into question the very rights that define “American Justice.” Skeptics debate how the court could overturn cases like Obergefell v. Hodges, the case that legalized Gay marriage.
The events of the past 3 days have Americans questioning if staples of American justice such as being read your “Miranda rights” will remain. The dangerous and wild interpretations of the Roberts Court pose a threat to the already thin rights of the accused.
Americans are confused, and rightfully so. Today's verdict added to growing frustration with the supreme court, which will boil over. Rights of the accused, the right to control your body, and basic gun control laws are at the whim of a court that continues to prove that it’s willing to throw them away using razor-thin interpretations.
Consideration of such dangerous cases is and continues to pose a threat to the very rights that are so ingrained in our national psyche and staples to American life.