The courts have once again taken a swing at pro-life legislation, blocking Georgia’s heartbeat bill permanently and putting a hold on Tennessee’s just 45 minutes after it was signed into law by the governor.
Pro-life legislation is consistently held to an impossible standard by the courts, and that trend is becoming more prevalent even as the culture becomes more pro-life. Chief Justice John Roberts, who sometimes seems to view his job more as the Supreme Court’s PR man than anything else, most recently joined the liberal justices (whose lockstep votes are rarely questioned) in carving out special exemptions for the abortion industry.
Compare the treatment of pro-life legislation to gun control. While the court fabricated an untouchable right to abortion from the “emanations and penumbras” of the Constitution, the Second Amendment is clearly spelled out and was affirmed by the Supreme Court as an individual right in 2008. Yet while Tennessee’s heartbeat bill was immediately blocked as a lawsuit plays out, a lawsuit against Virginia’s most recent gun control law wasn’t enough to stop a court from letting it take effect.
The Supreme Court has been content to observe these differences and do nothing. Roberts and the liberal justices have continued to capitulate to the abortion industry, while a recent call from Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh to take more Second Amendment cases has remained unanswered.
The result is that pro-life legislation, like the heartbeat bills from Georgia and Tennessee, is dead on arrival due to the lawsuits thrown by abortion mill Planned Parenthood and the left-wing activists at the American Civil Liberties Union. Roe v. Wade, we hear from those ranging from Planned Parenthood to the media to Roberts himself, is some untouchable precedent, despite the fact that it’s still 11 years younger than the pro-segregation 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson was when it was overturned by Brown v. Board of Education in 1954.
The refusal of the courts to allow legislators to legislate on abortion-related issues is inexcusable, and it’s a standard they exclusively reserve for the pro-life movement. Is it really any wonder, then, what Republicans are willing to tolerate from their own party in the pursuit of judges more faithful to the Constitution?
