NRL News

Wall Street Journal lays out the wisdom of returning the abortion issue to the states

by | Apr 27, 2022

By Dave Andrusko

We are roughly two months away from a Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The excitement is palpable: What will the justices do with the Mississippi law prohibiting abortion after the 15th week? 

We have published dozens of stories on the Gestational Age Act and will continue doing so up to (and after) the justices rendered their conclusion. The law was passed in 2018 but as is the nature of the beast it took nearly four years to work its way up the judicial ladder until it reached the highest rung.

The Wall Street Journal ran a thoughtful editorial yesterday under the headline “Abortion and the Supreme Court” with a subhead ofThis is the moment for the Justices to turn the issue over to the voters.” 

It offers many great insights. We’ll focus on just two.

#1. As you would expect, Democrats and the Abortion Industry and most of the media have gone apoplectic at the prospect of empowering the states to address abortion in their own unique way, which (we forget) was the case prior to January 22, 1973. 

For example, “The campaign may be the most apocalyptic in its warnings since the ObamaCare case in 2012,” the editorial board writes. Later, “The press is keeping up a steady campaign on the theme that the ‘Supreme Court is broken.’” Still later they quote the Planned Parenthood Action Fund which apocalyptically warned “Abortion Access Is Being Dismantled.”  The British newspaper, the Guardian,  warned, “We are witnessing the final days of reproductive freedom.”

#2. Hyperbole aside—“back alley abortion” are dutifully predicted when even most fervent pro-abortions realize this is nonsense—this campaign is of a piece with warnings to “pack the Court.” The two newest justices—Judge Kavanaugh and Judge Barrett–will be “the particular targets.” 

The objective? “All of this is aimed at swaying the Justices to step back from overturning Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey,” according to the Wall Street Journal editorial board. “Far better for the Court to leave the thicket of abortion regulation and return the issue to the states. A political uproar would ensue, but then voters would decide on abortion policy through elections—starting in November.”

What about that? We have two other pieces today that strongly suspect the predicted “backlash” is largely a figment of the Democrat Party/Abortion Industry imagination: “What Google Can Tell Us About the Abortion Debate” by Kelsey Hazzard of Secular Pro-Life, and “Dems grow alarmed by lack of fear over Roe’s future,” an article in Politico

The Wall Street Journal editorial concludes

In Dobbs the Court can say that such a profound moral question should be decided by the people, not by nine unelected judges.


Categories: Roe v. Wade