Justice Clarence Thomas on Tuesday bluntly warned the other justices on the U.S. Supreme Court that they need to start acting on various abortion-law cases because of the industry’s threat “to achieve eugenic goals,” which he warned, “is not merely hypothetical.”
Progressives are usually quick to point out that they are the champions of women and minorities. This position is disingenuous at best. When you consider that 75% of those affected by abortion are women (including 50% those aborted), and the disproportionate numbers of abortions in the Black and Hispanic communities, KN tends to agree with Justice Thomas.
Left unchecked, the modern eugenics movement will expand to demands for abortions for purposes of sex selection and other undesirable traits — all on the taxpayer’s dollar.
It seems that Abortion has become the defining and dividing line in American politics. Leading up to the 2016 Presidential Election cycle the Mainstream Media were claiming that Conservative Christians were becoming “one-issue voters,” with Abortion claiming the top spot. I was actually warned against this attitude at that time by many not-so-conservative clergy.
Now the battle lines are being drawn. Since President Trump’s appointment of two conservative Supreme Court Justices, states have been feverishly drafting and passing bills solidifying their positions, either for or against abortion, should Roe be overturned.
In Justice Clarence Thomas’ recent 20-page concurring opinion, he likened not just abortion but also birth control to eugenics, by taking shots at his Supreme Court colleague Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
“Justice Ginsburg’s dissent from this holding makes little sense,” wrote Thomas, 70. “It is not a ‘waste’ of our resources to summarily reverse an incorrect decision that created a Circuit split.”
“Justice Thomas’ footnote … displays more heat than light,” replied Ginsburg, 86. “The note overlooks many things: ‘This Court reviews judgment, not statements in opinions’ [and] a woman who exercises her constitutionally protected right to terminate a pregnancy is not a ‘mother.’”
The two longest-serving justices were sniping at each other over a compromise decision on an Indiana law that essentially punted the battle royal over Roe v. Wade to the next term at the earliest. On a 7-to-2 vote, the high court overturned the 7th Circuit and upheld the state’s mandate that the “remains” of an abortion or miscarriage be buried or cremated, as required of other human remains. But the justices left intact the appellate court’s decision that blocked another part of the same law from going into effect. That provision would have prohibited women from choosing abortions after a diagnosis or “potential diagnosis” of Down syndrome or “any other disability,” or because of the fetus’s gender or race.
The three-page unsigned decision in Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky emphasizes that the court is not taking a position one way or another on “whether Indiana may prohibit the knowing provision of sex-, race-, and disability selective abortions by abortion providers.”
Thomas said the Supreme Court cannot continue kicking that can down the road. “Although the court declines to wade into these issues today, we cannot avoid them forever,” he wrote.“Having created the constitutional right to an abortion, this Court is dutybound to address its scope.”
The justices have been grappling since January with the Indiana law, signed by Mike Pence in 2016 when he was governor, and there were several hints of behind-the-scenes machinations. While Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor said they would have let both lower-court decisions remain in place, their fellow liberals Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan said nothing.
Thomas is the only justice remaining on the court who participated in the Planned Parenthood v. Casey case in 1992. He was one of four justices who said they would have effectively overturned Roe if they could. Thomas has often made clear that he believes Roe was a mistake. As part of the compromise 27 years ago to get Anthony Kennedy’s vote for saving Roe, the court created a new standard: Restrictions on abortion could not impose an “undue burden” for women. What constitutes an undue burden has been up for debate ever since.
This was one of the flashpoints in Tuesday’s squabbling between Thomas and Ginsburg, who argued that compelling a woman to bury the remains of an aborted fetus could be traumatizing. “The cost of, and trauma potentially induced by, a post-procedure requirement may well constitute an undue burden,” she wrote.
Thomas noted that Planned Parenthood didn’t make that argument before the lower court. “This argument is difficult to understand, to say the least—which may explain why even respondent Planned Parenthood did not make it,” he wrote. “The argument also lacks evidentiary support.”
“Under the rational-basis standard,” Ginsburg replied, “Planned Parenthood … had no need to marshal evidence that Indiana’s law posed an undue burden.”
At least 20 cases related to abortion are in the pipeline, any of which could be used by the five conservative justices to upend or otherwise roll back the core holding of Roe. “The court almost surely will consider during the term that begins in October a Louisiana law that imposes restrictions on doctors who perform abortions there,” Robert Barnes reports. “A challenge to a separate Indiana law requiring a waiting period for an abortion after a woman has a sonogram is awaiting action at the court, as is a restriction on a commonly used procedure in second-trimester abortions. Even more restrictive laws, such as an Alabama measure that would virtually outlaw abortion there, are unlikely to reach the Supreme Court anytime soon.”
Thomas’s opinion repeatedly cited a book by Adam Cohen on the Supreme Court’s 8-to-1 ruling in Buck v. Bell in 1927 to uphold forced sterilization. But Cohen, the author of “Imbeciles,” said the justice’s interpretation of his work is “not quite in line with history,” especially his attempts to link abortion and birth control to eugenics. “Sterilization laws were about the government deciding, while abortion laws are about the woman deciding,” Cohen told the Wall Street Journal. “She is not thinking about the future of the race, she is thinking about whether to have a particular child.”
THE ABORTION WARS CONTINUE TO RAGE IN MANY AREAS
— Missouri could become the first state without a clinic that performs abortions, Planned Parenthood officials warned, suing the state yesterday to allow its clinic in St. Louis to continue offering the procedure past the end of this week.“Planned Parenthood officials said the state’s health department is threatening not to renew the organization’s license to offer abortions in St. Louis, the only place in Missouri that provides the procedure,” Marisa Iati reports. “The license expires Friday, and if it isn’t renewed, Planned Parenthood president Leana Wen said, ‘this will be the first time since 1974 that safe, legal abortion care will be inaccessible to people in an entire state.’ … The nonprofit said the clinic ‘has maintained 100 percent compliance’ with the law. …
“Although five clinics in Missouri performed abortions in 2008, that number fell to two by 2018. It dropped to one facility in October after Planned Parenthood’s Columbia Health Center could not meet new state requirements that abortion providers receive admitting privileges at hospitals within 15 minutes of their clinics, according to NPR. According to the Guttmacher Institute, which advocates for abortion access, five other states have just one clinic that performs abortions: Kentucky, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota, and West Virginia.”
Missouri Gov. Mike Parson (R) signed a bill last week that criminalizes abortion after eight weeks of pregnancy when some women do not even realize they’re pregnant. There are no exceptions in the new law for rape or incest.
— To prepare for a possible post-Roe world, several blue states are expanding abortion rights: Democrats in the Illinois House advanced a bill last night to remove restrictions on certain late-term abortions and scrap criminal penalties for doctors arising from a 1975 law whose enforcement has been blocked by the courts. The bill advanced on a 64-to-50 vote, with six Democrats in opposition. It now goes to the Democratic-controlled state Senate, and the Democratic governor is expected to sign it.
“Last week, lawmakers in Maine advanced legislation expanding abortion providers. Meanwhile, the majority-female Nevada Assembly approved a bill doing away with the requirement that doctors inform women of the ‘emotional implications’ of an abortion. Legislation is pending in additional Democratic-controlled states, such as Massachusetts, where the ROE Act would authorize abortion after 24 weeks in certain situations,” Isaac Stanley-Becker reports. “In Vermont, both houses of the state’s General Assembly endorsed a measure earlier this month that recognizes reproductive choice as a ‘fundamental right.’ The state’s Republican governor, Phil Scott, has pledged not to veto the measure.”
Both Disney and Netflix have spoken out against the restrictive abortion law passed in Georgia. Many of Hollywood’s production companies shoot there thanks to the generous tax incentive. Some celebrities, including
Oscar-winning director Ron Howard, aka “Opie,” have vowed to boycott Georgia if the law is officially implemented in January, while others will instead donate earnings to organizations fighting against it. Netflix Chief Content Officer Ted Sarandos declared that while the streaming giant wouldn’t yet refrain from working in Georgia, it would partner with organizations in the legal fight against the law.
Actress Anne Hathaway, known for her role in The Princess Diaries films, decried the pro-life efforts of “white women” last week on Instagram, slamming them for their assistance in the passage of an Alabama law that has made abortion all but illegal in the state.
“Yes the anti-abortion movement is primarily about controlling women’s bodies under the premise (for many, sincere) of saving lives, and yes this law is primarily the work of white men HOWEVER a white woman sponsored the bill and a white woman signed it into law,” Hathaway wrote in reference to Rep. Terri Collins and Governor Kay Ivey of Alabama. “As we’re resisting, let us also call out the complicity of the white women who made this awful moment possible, and which–make no mistake–WILL lead to the unnecessary and avoidable deaths of women, a disproportionate number of whom will be poor and/or black.”
In the same Instagram post, she also copied a tweet that stated “62% of non-college educated white women voted Republican in 2016,” and then instructed her followers to donate to pro-choice organizations.
The Brooklyn-born Hathaway, herself a white woman, is an example of the ignorance and racism inherent in the pro-abortion position, with its deep roots in the eugenics movement. As former Patriots player Ben Watson said when calling out a similar sentiment expressed by Alyssa Milano: “To claim that giving MORE children of color the right to be born will negatively affect ‘women of color’ reveals IGNORANCE, RACISM or some combination of both. Our children and families are capable of greatness and lies like this harm our future. Don’t patronize us.” Watson rightly points out that the Black population, which has suffered so much at the hands of slavery and racism in the US, is only further harmed by abortion.
Yes, to a great extent, abortion should be that line in the sand where conservative voters stand. Science shows us that life begins at the moment of “sperm-egg fusion.” Neither a heartbeat nor proclaiming an arbitrary point of “viability” changes the fact that a living person is inside of each expectant mother.
Justice Ginsburg is flat out wrong in her claims that “a woman who exercises her constitutionally protected right to terminate a pregnancy is not a ‘mother.” I’m certain that most women who experience the loss of a child through miscarriage will vehemently disagree with her. KN