They Won't Talk About The Law

It is a weird phenomenon these days with the left.

When Taylor Lorenz attacked LibsofTikTok in the Washington Post, she would not actually show the videos the LibsofTikTok account highlighted. They had to be characterized because they were too obscene to show and defend.

When the New York Times ran a story denouncing parents banning a graphic comic called “Gender Queer,” the paper would not show the pictures in the book that caused parents to pull the book from libraries. The book, designed for pre-teens and young teens, graphically depicted sex.

When the left went after Florida’s Parental Rights in Education law, they called it the “Don’t Say Gay” law. They wouldn’t cite the law itself but mischaracterized it. They would not acknowledge or admit all the times teachers had been having explicit sexual discussions with young children or saying absurd things like doctors guess a baby’s sex at birth and sometimes get it wrong.

Now, with the abortion discussion, the left wants to discuss the policy, but they won’t talk about the law.

Abortion, as a right, is found nowhere in the constitution. It is several degrees removed in fact. Abortion is a right found via the fourth, ninth, and fourteenth amendments. It was conjured by seven men in 1973 out of a privacy right that itself was derived from the fourth amendment, though not explicit in the constitution. The privacy right could at least be defended. The abortion right really cannot on a jurisprudential basis. Don’t believe me — ask Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She long argued Roe v Wade was a terribly reasoned opinion.

A policy that you support does not mean it is a constitutional right.

Fox News has polling out that shows a majority of Americans want to restrict or ban abortion. This is consistent with trends across the nation. The left-media bubble would beg to differ. But, again, they cannot have a conversation about jurisprudence. They demand we have a policy discussion and, in favoring that policy, they believe it is a constitutional right.

They cannot be honest.

Jeffrey Toobin, CNN’s legal analyst, while married got a colleague’s daughter pregnant and tried to force her into an abortion. The seven men on the Supreme Court who advanced abortion as a right were not really there to help advance women, but to protect men like Toobin from responsibility. Toobin has vocally denounced the Court in the past few days and he, a constitutional legal analyst, will not engage with the constitution on the merits.

Careerist women who were led to believe they can have their cake and eat it too used abortion as a means of “family planning.” The left blocked a Republican effort to make birth control over the counter so they could continue to offer abortion as a family planning alternative.

Never have they wanted to discuss the actual constitution, its amendment process, or the flimsy basis under which Roe was decided.

At least, if there is one upside, it will be that the left suddenly remembers states matter and the tenth amendment matters. For too long, because of abortion politics, Washington has been the center of the universe and through it the left and right have fought over regulations, laws, and judges focused on abortion.

Now, the states must return to the forefront. Federalism, as the founders intended, is the solution. That, in and of itself, is why the Supreme Court must get rid of Roe. They overstepped their bounds, took from the states a power that belonged to them, and conjured a right with no historic basis or justification in American constitutional jurisprudence.

Let the future commence.