Discover more from Hennessy's View
Supreme Court Clerk Leaks Draft Opinion Overturning Roe v. Wade in Hopes of Intimidating Court Majority *UPDATE*
If the court changes its decision now, civil war is almost certain
A rogue Supreme Court clerk may triggered a civil war.
There are few institutions left in America that honor, respect, and uphold the Constitution. Perhaps the last hope for the rule of law is the Supreme Court.
Most Americans have low opinions of every aspect the government. In the past four years, even the US military, FBI, and CIA have proven themselves enemies of the Constitution. The Supreme Court is the last hope for America.
Now, a Supreme Clerk as leaked to the leftist blog Politico a draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, indicating that trial votes show the majority of the court is ready to jettison the 1973 ruling that has killed over 60 million unborn children and divided the nation.
Politico itself provided the clerk’s motivation: to create a firestorm that will intimidate the court’s majority into changing their votes.
But the court can’t wait. We know from the Trump appointments that the left will unleash a wicked fury of demonic threats, intimidation, and terrorism to influence the court. The Department of Justice will not protect the Supreme Court, nor will the DC police. The Supreme Court’s majority is literally on its own.
Moreover, opponents of abortion know now that a majority of the court finds Roe v. Wade repugnant. The opinion by Justice Allito is devastating and accurate:
“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision....”
“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Caseyhave enflamed debate and deepened division. It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
“In the years prior to [Roe v. Wade], about a third of the States had liberalized their laws, but Roe abruptly ended that political process. It imposed the same highly restrictive regime on the entire Nation, and it effectively struck down the abortion laws of every single State. … [I]t represented the ‘exercise of raw judicial power’… and it sparked a national controversy that has embittered our political culture for a half-century.”
“The inescapable conclusion is that a right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions. On the contrary, an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of the common law until 1973.”
“In some States, voters may believe that the abortion right should be more even more [sic] extensive than the right Casey and Roe recognized. Voters in other States may wish to impose tight restrictions based on their belief that abortion destroys an ‘unborn human being.’ ... Our nation’s historical understanding of ordered liberty does not prevent the people’s elected representatives from deciding how abortion should be regulated.”
“We have long recognized, however, that stare decisis is ‘not an inexorable command,’ and it ‘is at its weakest when we interpret the Constitution.’ It has been said that it is sometimes more important that an issue ‘be settled than that it be settled right.’ But when it comes to the interpretation of the Constitution — the ‘great charter of our liberties,’ which was meant ‘to endure through a long lapse of ages,’ we place a high value on having the matter ‘settled right.’”
“On many other occasions, this Court has overruled important constitutional decisions. … Without these decisions, American constitutional law as we know it would be unrecognizable, and this would be a different country.”
”Casey described itself as calling both sides of the national controversy to resolve their debate, but in doing so, Casey necessarily declared a winning side. … The Court short-circuited the democratic process by closing it to the large number of Americans who dissented in any respect from Roe. … Together, Roe and Casey represent an error that cannot be allowed to stand.”
“Roe certainly did not succeed in ending division on the issue of abortion. On the contrary, Roe ‘inflamed’ a national issue that has remained bitterly divisive for the past half-century....This Court’s inability to end debate on the issue should not have been surprising. This Court cannot bring about the permanent resolution of a rancorous national controversy simply by dictating a settlement and telling the people to move on. Whatever influence the Court may have on public attitudes must stem from the strength of our opinions, not an attempt to exercise ‘raw judicial power.’”
“We do not pretend to know how our political system or society will respond to today’s decision overruling Roe and Casey. And even if we could foresee what will happen, we would have no authority to let that knowledge influence our decision. We can only do our job, which is to interpret the law, apply longstanding principles of stare decisis, and decide this case accordingly. We therefore hold that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion. Roe and Casey must be overruled, and the authority to regulate abortion must be returned to the people and their elected representatives.”
To the majority of Americans who oppose abortion on demand, these words are now the law of the land. A surprise ruling to the contrary would be seen, rightly, as a victory for thug intimidation and the end of the rule of law. The Constitution will have fallen under the weight of a corrupt and timid government, including the judicial system.
The Supreme Court cannot now change its mind without the risk of triggering a civil war. The right has constrained itself through decades of abuse and terrorism from the left on the belief that the system would right these wrongs, that we cannot short-circuit the very system we wish to conserve. But if the Supreme Court folds to the law of jungle, the right will gladly adopt a might-makes-right approach. It will have no choice.
In short, if the Supreme Court now fails to overturn Roe v. Wade, the Constitution is dead and a competition to establish a new nation on this continent will be underway.
MARK LEVIN: When you conduct yourself in an utterly lawless way, attacking the institutions of this country, attacking the founding documents of this country, attacking the history of this country, this is what you get: lawlessness. It's just a matter of time. All these institutions are going to collapse. This is a grave assault on the Supreme Court. When I was in law school, I was actually an intern to Chief Justice Warren Burger. I saw how it operated, and I can tell you this institution takes its confidentiality seriously. Why? That's the coin of the realm. They've got to be able to talk about ideas freely. They've got to be able to discuss this without political pressure. Why do people think these are lifetime appointments? Of course, the Democrat Party is destroying this country. Look at the confirmation process. It started with Bork. The Democrats targeted him under [Sen. Ted] Kennedy and Biden, and it moves on to others, including Clarence Thomas, including Kavanaugh. Republicans don't treat Democrat nominees this way. They may object to them. When you say the Supreme Court doesn't look like America, you're undermining the credibility of the court.