Row v. Wade gets spun this way: there is some hidden and unwritten right to privacy in the US Constitution that says that a woman has the right to terminate an inconvenient pregnancy. An entire philosophy has sprung up around the disgusting idea that unfettered abortion rights are the pinnacle of American constitutional rights, the metaphorical canary in the coal mine of individual liberties. Let me destroy that repugnant myth right now by providing another perspective on what that decision really means.
Anyone who pays attention knows that the majority pretty much reverse engineered that decision: they personally believed in abortion rights and they contorted the constitution as much as it took to ensure that their own agenda got “constitutionalized”. Since this vacuous “right to privacy” only applies to women vacuuming out inconvenient babies it is pretty obvious that this is not a high minded vindication of individual rights but instead just another case of the statists using the courts to implement their own agenda on the rest of us, having failed to do so via the legitimate process of democracy.
Contrary to claims that Roe v Wade was a breakthrough decision that increased the rights of Americans, I submit that rather than granting rights to Americans this decision is more correctly described as one where the US Supreme Court stepped well over their constitutional powers in usurping states rights and implemented a new tyranny that chooses to dictate rather than allow democracy. Roe v. Wade represents the Supremes elevating themselves to the status of gods who answer to nothing, not even the constitution, and they handed down a decision with no constitutional basis simply because it fit their agenda. I like what William Rhenquist said in his dissent:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.[
This is why judges who ignore the Constitution, like Sonia Sotomayor, should never be allowed on the highest court in the land. She thinks that foreign law is relevant – but if her job is to judge laws against the US Constitution then foreign law is as relevant as fictional Klingon laws. She thinks that race is relevant to her judgement of the constitution and most damningly she thinks that policy should be made in the courts. She is a dangerous black-robed tyrant set on running every aspect of your life. They cannot get their statist agenda through the messiness of representative democracy and have turned to the courts to implement their self-congratulatory tyranny.