NRL News

The kinds of laws that will lead to overturning Roe v. Wade

by | Mar 11, 2013

By Dave Andrusko

“Opponents of choice will not let up until Roe v. Wade is overturned.” — From “The latest strike at abortion rights,” an editorial that appeared today in the New Jersey Star-Ledger.

Federal District Judge B. Lynn Winmill

Federal District Judge B. Lynn Winmill

Well….ah…. yeah, that’s exactly how pro-lifers feel. That’s what motivates us in good days and especially in bad. Pro-Lifers will not rest until Roe just Dred Scott and other disastrous Supreme Court decisions in the judicial dustbin.

What set off this particular editorial (first two lines—“If you think the back-alley abortion is a thing of the past, think again. We’re closer to it than you think”) was a law in Arkansas. But a cagier pro-abortionist, Irin Carmon, wrote a piece that drew a different conclusion.

As a good headline and subhead, ought to do, we get the gist of Carmon’s argument encapsulated: “The real threat to abortion rights– Arkansas’ ban gets the attention, but quietly passed laws and a careful court strategy may pose even more danger.”

Carmon spends a lot of time on the decision by “A Clinton-appointed judge, B. Lynn Winmill” which we wrote about twice last week. Winmill overturned Idaho’s Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act for reasons which we (unsurprisingly) disagreed with. The law, which has been passed in seven other states, says, you can’t slaughter huge unborn babies capable of feeling pain.

Carmon takes comfort from the fact that the plaintiff won twice with the same judge and a three-judge panel. Her story reads almost as if this should  calm (if not subtly rebuke) pro-abortion nervous nellies—the ones who said DON’T challenge that law and certainly not with this particular client.

She then switches gears and quotes from NRLC’s press release where Director of State Legislation Mary Spaulding Balch, JD, reiterates what we’ve been saying since forever: of course some judge somewhere would say it’s okay to dismember pain-sensitive unborn children. But let’s see what happens if and when the Supreme Court looks at the evidence supporting the claim of fetal pain it says, “We don’t care. Women’s rights, Roe v. Wade, autonomy—whatever. Kill away.” My guess is the justices won’t.

Carmon then ends with an acknowledgement that pro-lifers are impatient with the deaths but grasp that this ghastly decision will only be overturned with a step-by-step strategy. With the help of state legislatures that have pro-life majorities in both houses and a pro-life governor (or have majorities large enough to overturn a veto), more laws will be passed, challenged, and brought before the courts.

And you can thank National Right to Life for the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act and for passage of almost all the laws that will eventually rid us of Roe v. Wade.

Categories: Legislation