Until recently, the Democratic Party’s electoral prospects ahead of the November legislative elections were grim, to put it mildly. With President Joe Biden’s popularity on the floor – below 40 percent, according to several polls -, rampant inflation that has Americans on the ropes, and the historical trend that the party in power tends to lose ground in midterm elections, there was already talk of a kind of ‘Republican tsunami’ that would give them back absolute control of Congress and probably even the White House in 2024.
(Also read: Abortion in the United States: Senate will vote on a project to protect it)
But this week a topic exploded that has many making new calculations. On Monday night, the newspaper Politico published the draft of a presentation by the Supreme Court of Justice, written by Judge Samuel Alito, in which Roe vs. Wade and Casey vs. Planned Parenthood, two previous court decisions that legalized abortion in the United States almost 50 years ago.
The draft, according to Politico, would already have the support of at least five of the nine magistrates that make up the institution (all conservatives), which would guarantee its approval, which is expected in June of this year.
According to Alito’s reasoning, neither the US Constitution, nor its subsequent amendments, refer to or mention the right to abortion, and therefore the Supreme Court, which granted it in 1973 and then reaffirmed it 19 years later, would have exceeded its functions. According to the judge, as long as there is no law of Congress that orders it, that decision corresponds to each state and its legislative apparatus.
Although the proposal does not prohibit abortion in the country, it does leave it mortally wounded in at least half of the states where Republicans are in the majority and who have been trying to ban it for decades. In factthere are already at least 13 that have approved “trigger laws”, which would come into force the day after the Court’s decision becomes official and that they would make abortion illegal, even in cases of rape or incest.
In other words, the United States would become a country divided in two, where half the population, particularly pregnant people, would not have access to the practice and those who assist them would be branded as criminals.
Both parties initially blamed each other for the unusual leak. For Republicans, it was a Democratic maneuver to influence the judges’ decision. For the latter, it was a strategy of their rivals to tie the vote of the conservative magistrates.
Conservatives aren’t just going for Roe vs. Wade but for many of the rights that have been granted in these last five decades or more.
Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed that the memorandum was legitimate, but not definitive, and ordered an investigation to get to the bottom of the matter.
The truth is that in the process an immense national debate of unpredictable consequences was unleashed. Throughout the week, thousands of people gathered outside the Court to protest. Women’s groups and pro-choice advocates across the country denounced the move as an assault on privacy by a white, Christian minority who want to impose their religious views on others.
Although the right to abortion has always been controversial, in the United States a majority of people, according to the most recent polls, believe that it should be maintained. In the most recent one made by the Washington Post and ABC, 54 percent say that it should be preserved compared to 28 percent who think it should be finished.
“This Court statement not only destroys the concept of an independent and non-ideological institution, but also shows that it is not in tune with the sentiment of the great majority,” says Dahlia Litwick, a constitutional attorney at the University of Virginia.
Although the criticism was concentrated in the Democratic and progressive universe, even high-level Republicans declared themselves dumbfounded. Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins, two senators from this party, accused the justices of misleading them during their confirmation process. According to them, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, the three justices nominated by Donald Trump, had indicated in their testimony before the Senate that Roe v. Wade was a precedent that they considered settled matter.
“If what that leaked document says is true, it would be completely inconsistent with what they told us at their confirmation hearings.Collins stated.
This week that starts, the Democrats in the Upper House are going to present a project that would protect the right at the federal level and make it immune to a decision by the Court. However, the party does not have the 60 votes necessary to approve it. But what is certain is that the process will expose many Republicans who will vote against it, especially if there are defections.
“Americans will get to see this week whether Republicans are going to side with extremists who want to outlaw abortion without exception, or with women, their families, and the vast majority of the country,” Senate President Chuck Shummer said. announce the bill.
But the issue goes much further. According to Democrats, conservatives aren’t just going for Roe vs. Wade but for many of the rights that have been granted in these last five decades or more. Among them, marriages between people of the same sex, the right to obtain contraceptive methods and even the unions of people between different races, to name just a few.
Americans will be able to see if Republicans will ally themselves with extremists who want to ban abortion without exception, or with women, their families, and the vast majority of the country.
This is because none of these rights are not written in the Constitution either, since, like abortion, they were granted based on the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees the right to privacy. And if Roe falls, anyone else, or all, can fall under the same argument.
“Reverse Roe vs. Wade is a direct attack on freedom, on the fundamental right of self-determination. When that right to privacy is attacked, everyone in this country faces a future in which the government can interfere with personal decisions. Not just women, but everything,” Vice President Kamala Harris said combatively.
Biden, for his part, called it a radical stance that could destroy the very fabric that holds the country together. “And what else are they going to attack? (the president wondered). Because the Trumpists (Maga) are actually the most extreme political organization in the recent history of this country.”
And that is precisely the idea that the Democrats hope to capitalize on in electoral terms. Over the last three decades, the party has won the popular vote in seven of the last nine presidential elections. Despite this, the Republicans have ended up choosing six of the current nine judges.
Trump and George Bush, who lost the popular vote but came to power through the Electoral College, put up five. At least one of them in an extremely controversial way, since the Senate Republicans blocked the nominee chosen by Barack Obama to replace the late Antonin Scalia on the grounds that a judge of the Court was not chosen in an election year, but then they ran to confirm Trump’s appointee after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg with just two months to go before the 2020 election.
A Senate, needless to say, in which this party has 50 votes (half) despite receiving 25 million fewer votes than the Democrats. In other words, the Republicans, thanks to structural advantages –and others not so sacrosanct–, have a disproportionate level of power in terms of their popular support, which is about to materialize in the case of abortion.
Something that is becoming a rallying cry for Democrats. According to a study from the University of Virginia, there is no doubt that the end of Roe vs. Wade is going to motivate Democratic voters, who came from the doldrums. “It remains to be seen what the Court decides. But if this holds up, we could move from a likely sweep to a more competitive election,” the report says.
They do note, however, that the current malaise over the state of the economy is so great that it is probably not enough. We’ll see. What is already clear is that if the end of Roe vs. Wade this will have profound implications that go far beyond the next election cycle and will change the course of the nation.
SERGIO GOMEZ MASERI
Correspondent of THE TIME
Washington
@sergom68
#Rollback #abortion #rights #United #States #divides #country