What if previous rulings on abortion, under the US Constitution, were correct? At the very least you are calling for ‘activist judges’. At worse you are seeking partiality in judges. Either option is wrong.
It is better to change laws on abortion than to try to stack the courts with friendly judges.
In a perfect judicial world, you would have justices who are apolitical, have no agenda either liberal or conservative, and would interpret the Constitution strictly as written pursuant to the intent of the founders. Perhaps that is why conservative justice nominees refuse to say “yes, I am going to try my best to find a way to save the unborn in the Constitution, and overturn as much of
Roe v Wade as I can”. They might have that in mind, but they dare not speak it, not even after they are confirmed.
On the other hand, liberal justice nominees have no compunction about proclaiming their own “partiality”. The way liberal thought works, their basket of assumptions is the absolute truth, dogma that no one may question. To their minds, they are so obviously “right”, that if you disagree with them, you are a bad person whose point of view need not even be considered. They also have a mentality of
“they’ll come around, it’s inexorable, it may take time, but we’re right, and they will eventually see that”. Not the most tolerant creatures on the face of the earth. Let’s put it another way — how often do you meet a liberal who is willing to consider that they
might be wrong, that they might need to take a more “conservative” stance on this or that? Doesn’t happen. I’ve never met one yet, and I’ve known a whole lot of liberals.
Yet I will concede, it might be possible that abortion simply isn’t addressed, one way or the other, in the Constitution. Even if there is no “right to privacy”, there may be no “right to life” for the unborn. The Constitution doesn’t entertain the question of “when does life begin, life that is protected by law?”. It’s hard to say whether the founders even thought about this. I tend to doubt it was anywhere on their radar. What then? Amend the Constitution? “Right to life from the moment of conception”? Good luck getting
that passed. Trimesters are just a made-up construct.
These recent cases stand for the opposite of the idea that a president can (or needs to) change the composition of the court with one or two picks. Both of the decisions in favor of religious institutions were 7-2. In the abortion decision only one justice (Thomas) said he would vote to overturn Roe and Casey. Religious freedom is not hanging by a thread, and illegalizing abortion is not one vote away. Both are just scare tactics that both parties use to rile up the base.
We just got lucky those two times.
