If President Donald Trump wants to do it, he can be the president whose Supreme Court nominees overturn Roe.
One court vacancy is already waiting to be filled. This is the seat on the court that was held by the late Justice Scalia. Since Justice Scalia was a pro life vote, filling his vacancy with another pro life justice will not change the balance on the court. But the next vacancy to occur will change that balance. For the first time in 50 years, we could have a pro life Supreme Court.
If President Trump nominates a pro life justice two times, Roe will fall.
Since the Senate is majority Republican, and since at least one of the sitting justices is both elderly and in frail health, this is likely to happen. I am hoping that it does, but to be honest, I’m not holding my breath.
Pro life presidents have a dismal record in this regard. If they had done a better job of nominating genuinely pro life people to the Court, Roe would have fallen a number of years ago. But the nominees of pro life presidents often end up voting pro abortion once they’re confirmed.
Pro choice presidents, on the other hand, have a 100% record of succeeding in appointing pro abortion justices. They manage to do it even when the opposite party has control of the Senate.
How has this happened? I think the answer is simple. Both political parties need the abortion wars for electioneering. Also — and I hate to say it, but, based on my first-hand experience in these matters, I know it’s true — pro choice politicians tend to be a lot more sincere in their convictions behind closed doors than pro life politicians. It’s just a plain fact, and we have 50 years of shenanigans to back it up, that “our” elected officials can’t figure out how to get pro-life work done nearly as well as pro choice politicians manage to deliver the goods for the abortion crowd.
So now, when pro life people have essentially traded every other Gospel teaching and Christian moral value they hold to elect this man to the presidency, the question remains: Will he nominate a true-blue pro-life justice, or will he manage to look like he’s trying to do that, fail, and then blame the opposition for his failure?
Another important factor is whether or not the Senate leadership will actually pull out all the stops to get a pro life justice confirmed, even if the president successfully nominates one. I’ve already been getting the same emails I imagine a lot of you have received, urging me to get ready for the really big Senate fight when our opposition tries to stop the appointment of a pro life justice.
There will be opposition. That goes without saying. But pro life senators have the power to come through on this. It’s just a matter of them making it as important as they do things like corporate pork barrel and tax cuts for the wealthy. If they do that, the Senate will confirm the nominee. If they fail to confirm, you can bet that they didn’t do the job we elected them to do and are now blaming their own behavior on the evil opposition.
I want to go back to what I said earlier: Both parties need Roe. They need abortion to cover for the travesty of governance they foist on this nation. Without abortion, We the People might take a more intelligent look at what they are doing to us.
Overturning Roe would be a kind of political suicide for a number of these senators.
If we want to end abortion, we need to understand that it can be done. We’ve given this president elect and this United States Senate all the power they need to do it. If they fail, don’t let them come back whining about how they need more power; how a majority in both houses of Congress and the presidency just isn’t enough for them to nominate and confirm pro life justices to the Supreme Court, and how what they really need is to eliminate all opposition before they can manage to confirm a pro life justice to the Supreme Court.
That would be a lie. If we believe it, then we are betraying the children of this nation.
Let me say again, Roe can be overturned in the next four years. We’ve given these people the power. But we need to be forceful with the people we put in office. We need to make absolutely certain that both the President and the Senators we elected understand that if they don’t give us pro life Supreme Court justices, we won’t buy any more of their excuses in the next cycle.
If we don’t do that, they’ll find a way to fail. You just watch.
I put that part in bold myself. Of course, I wanted to quote this article, but I just put it up in its entirety instead because it no longer exists. American Papist has given way to https://www.catholicvote.org/.
So, what's up Catholic Vote? Why'd you take it down? It is legit. Let me tell you how legit it is: Trump indicates he's okay with the gay 'marriage' thing, yet can tell reversing Roe v Wade means taking the abortion issue back down to the state level. He could reduce the scope of the Supreme court to federal law. Depending on what he wants to do, he may not even need to appoint a justice- leave them even and any split decisions get returned back to a lower court.
Whether or not he's meaning to leave abortion on the table like regular politicians do, so far, he is on that path. The larger problem, which will very likely be a problem for him, if he doesn't figure it out and do something about it, is the Supreme court itself.
Another problem for Trump will be the inevitable holier-than-thou attack from the right which will likely come- especially in four years. Additionally, the left will happily harp on the same issues to, except from the other side. The safest thing for Trump to do would be a shock and awe campaign in the first 100 days, where all of these issues get taken off the table- mostly by sending them to the states. Extra points if he cleans up the party enough to where new congressmen weren't corrupted by fund-raising for position.
If Trump returned these issues to the states, he or his chosen successor could run on a completely different set of issues, and frame the attacks as foolish: if you want to fight about state issues, go run in your state. Then, talk about actual federal issues. Given the number of state houses, that are also Republican, you might even be able to get things off the table for real- and have a Constitutional Convention.
This is the crux of the problem. Most things simply should not be decided on a political basis. You can't win by trying to turn the Supreme Court into your weapon; you can only win by taking the weapon away, and removing the capacity to interfere via politics. Politics perverts everyone, even companies, as they find it easier to make money by getting D.C. to give it to them than by doing normal business- which is why most 'anti-abortion' law reads like a gift to large medical institutions. They've got big lobbies too, and the lobbyists all hang out together. The pro-life lobbyist can pretend he's reducing abortion; the medical lobbyist gets to set up a future pricey monopoly for his bosses, once all the little clinics are regulated out of existence.