tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10968338.post114186085164853773..comments2023-08-11T09:56:34.039+01:00Comments on timrollpickering: Why laws not court rulings should decide great debatesTim Roll-Pickeringhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12589024696145675963noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10968338.post-1141995717461999122006-03-10T13:01:00.000+00:002006-03-10T13:01:00.000+00:00The idea that the "pro life" (sic) campaigners wil...The idea that the "pro life" (sic) campaigners will settle for merely overturning Roe vs. Wade is dubious. They will settle for nothing less than permanently entrenching a pro life position, whether through a Supreme Court ruling or a constitutional amendment.<BR/><BR/>Roe vs. Wade actually harmed to pro choice movement. It shifted the debate away from liberalising existing laws by persuading voters to vote packing the Supreme Court and made the issue a party political football. This is not a case of requiring an explicit decision on what is otherwise opinion creep but a polarisation of the debate to extreme proportions.Tim Roll-Pickeringhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12589024696145675963noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10968338.post-1141925375970024432006-03-09T17:29:00.000+00:002006-03-09T17:29:00.000+00:00OK, in short sentences with easy words:The US has ...OK, in short sentences with easy words:<BR/><BR/>The US has a constitution. It is written down on a piece of paper, and has primacy over ordinary laws. The supreme court is tasked with upholding the constitution.<BR/><BR/>The constitution enumerates certain rights that people have, that it guarantees will not be violated by US law. The supreme court in Roe v Wade ruled that a ban on abortion was a violation of a woman's constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy, and that therefore states were not permitted to ban it. It should be noted that before Roe, abortion was legal in some of the states.<BR/><BR/>There is much speculation that the Court will reverse its previous opinion and decide that, actually, the Constitution doesn't protect the right to abortion. If it makes that decision, then the issue will revert to the states. In other words, it will be up to the democratically expressed views of the majority in a state to decide if and how abortion should be permitted. <BR/><BR/>There is, of course, a democratic process to change the constitution, and if it is the view of the vast majority that the Supreme Court has done the wrong thing, the Constitution can be amended. There is a high bar to do so, which seems rather sensible - you really don't want 51% of the population to be able to abandon a fundamental right.<BR/><BR/>The existance of a written constitution with a high bar to changing it protects you somewhat against unconscious opinion-creep, where the political group-think drifts slowly over time in a particular direction (eg. in the UK away from legal ownership of guns). You can still change your view on basic rights, of course, but it has to be done explicitly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com