The New Supremes, Part 1

This is not a political blog.

Supreme Court

Seriously, I have written in the past about how I don’t want to focus on politics here. But I am interested in politics, and it’s hard for me to ignore certain events, when theory intersects with reality. Like today, for example.

The New Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case based on the Federal law prohibiting mid-term and late-term abortions, called by opponents “partial birth abortions.” What’s interesting about this is that the Old Supreme Court struck down an identical Nebraska law five years ago, and has since declined to hear any cases on the subject. The reason they struck down the law in the first place is that it made no exception for protecting the health of the mother, thus the government could have used it to force pregnant women and girls to risk their lives. The vote was five to four, with Sandra Day O’Conner voting in the majority. In any case, you’d think that would be that, and the Supremes would start looking around for other constitutional issues to consider.

But now John Roberts is in charge and setting the Court’s agenda, and Samuel Alito has replaced Sandra Day O’Conner. Roberts has agreed to revisit the Court’s position on a law that has been unconstitutional for the past five years, and I don’t think there’s much doubt how he and Alito will vote next year when this comes before the Court. After all, Alito is on record as saying that the landmark Roe v. Wade is bad law, and that it can be reversed by chipping away at it a little bit at a time. What a perfect opportunity for him to strike the first blow.

When Al Gore ran for President, and when John Kerry ran for President, we could have done something. We could have voted instead of staying home. Only a few popular votes would have made a difference. But in 2000 we were apparently overwhelmed by the evildoing of President Clinton, and by 2004 we were terribly frightened, so in both cases we had to elect the honorable and brave George W. Bush.

So Bush appointed these new guys, and there’s nothing we can do about them. They don’t have to pay any attention to what we want. Letter-writing and threatening to vote against them is useless, since they are not elected. Even throwing out the bums who appointed them won’t make any difference, since they have been appointed for life. They get to stay, for about thirty more years. We have to let them hear the case, deliberate, and vote on it, while we do what we seem to do best: Sit on our hands.

If Alito’s stated agenda of reversing abortion rights in this country a little bit at a time is successful, I think I’ll go into the abortion business. I’m not a doctor, but then if I were, I wouldn’t be allowed to perform abortions in our fundamentalist conservative future. I have a nice supply of coat hangers, sterilized with rum and a Bic lighter, so I think I’m qualified.

God forbid your little girl ever needs this service. If you’re wealthy, of course, you’ll always have access to safe, legal abortions overseas. If you’re not, get ready to send me your daughters.

Next: What can we do?

Share this:

8 Replies to “The New Supremes, Part 1”

  1. Hey, my 1st time to the new spot. I checked your sidebar & it’s good to know that you are at least trying to balance out your sex posts with your mechanix & politics. ;0)

    Coat hangers, rum and bic lighters….ouch. Sounds more like it belongs at a Jimmy Buffet concert. Thanks Alito…

  2. AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHH don’t do this to me. Like I used to tell my staff when I was a manager “please turn your complaint into a specific request.” Find out who’s fighting this (NOW? Center for Reproductive Rights?) or go to my armchair activist post for links, sample letters, at least . . . something . . . in the meanwhile, you’d better get some more rum, I’m drinking this bottle.

  3. T1 – I really have to get back to the sex posts. After categorizing all 175 posts on this blog (and re-reading some of them) I see that I have become even more boring than when I started.

    Jayne – Sorry. You know the law. This battle’s over. The war goes on.

  4. As is the case with many of the laws passed within the last few years, I find these laws seeking to control the individual rather than bring order to a disordered society, which for the most part we are not.

    The question I wonder about is just how much of our lives do we not want to be responsible for?

    Because the powers that be seem to be more than ready to tell us exactly how we should be behaving and living.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.