Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
Bizarrely agreeing with Pierre here that a fundamental right (if it is at all) shouldn’t rely upon 9 judicial appointees skewing really hard at a 200 year old document and a right to privacy overturning the opinion of 9 judicial appointees 50 years earlier.
If a democracy wants to legalise abortion it should have a clear law that states the circumstances under which it is so enacted by it’s elected representatives only.
While there is a role the judiciary to interpret law, it’s scope, purpose and intent it’s simply preposterous to claim that the US constitution written before abortion was a safe medical procedure intended to legalise it.
|
Therein lies a hurdle. To fully legalise abortion in all 50 States, I’d say would need to have a Constitutional Amendment, Amendment 28. That way, no individual State can create any law banning it and no matter how many Supreme Court Justices, there are, it would be “Unconstitutional”, to rule any kind of ban, or release any prior rule that puts back at State level.
The hurdle as mentioned above, an Amendment would be almost impossible today. The Founding Fathers, or “Framers”, the men who wrote the Constitution, wanted the amendment process to be as difficult as possible. Their belief, was that a long and complicated amendment process would help create balance & stability in the United States.
The chart below highlights how difficult it would be today to create an Amendment.
Difficult because America is too divided, you’d never get 3/4 States to agree with each other. You’d never get two thirds majority in both Houses of Congress.