Speyside2 wrote:^ Try not to think you know lawyers think, you don't. It is better to ask a group of lawyers. If you had done so, you would have found out that they are torn between precedent and basis.
We live in the United States. The Supreme Court is the head of the judiciary branch of our government. If they are doing their job, often there will be decisions a significant % strongly disagree with. If you disagree or agree with Roe v Wade being overturned you should be advocating at the state level about your states abortion laws.
Everyone including me would do well to brush up on what the federal government constitutionally can and cannot do. We are arguing about a symptom not the problem.
Actually yes - I DO know what many lawyers think. I'm one of them. I went to law school and took several constitutional law classes - so I do believe I can speak with some authority on THIS subject. With respect to the quality of the reasoning in Roe I stand by my previous comment. It was a poorly reasoned decision that should have been overturned decades ago. Following precedent is clearly the goal of our judicial system, however, just because an unconstitutional law has been around for decades does NOT mean it should be left in place.
As for the rest of your comment - I agree with you 100%. Overturning Roe did NOT make abortion 'illegal' in the United States (as the PR arm of the DNC (CNN/MSNBC etc) likes to claim. It simply returned the issue to the states for the individual states to decide for themselves. You know - like how you would in a federal republic!