Here is how Roe v Wade violates the Constitution

Readability

Here is how Roe v Wade violates the Constitution

I firmly believe that abor­tion is mur­der. It is mur­der of the most help­less and inno­cent. I also believe that life begins at con­cep­tion. At the time of the writ­ing and rat­i­fi­ca­tion of the Con­sti­tu­tion every State treated abor­tion as mur­der, rely­ing on Eng­lish Com­mon law, rather than a for­mal State law. Abor­tion is not men­tioned in the US Con­sti­tu­tion nor is it defined as a crime. That is of no sig­nif­i­cance when it comes to allow­ing the States to crim­i­nal­ize abor­tion. Mur­der is not defined in the Con­sti­tu­tion nor is a pun­ish­ment pre­scribed, yet mur­der is ille­gal in all 50 States. The only crimes defined by the US Con­sti­tu­tion are trea­son, coun­ter­feit­ing, piracy and felonies com­mit­ted on the high seas, offenses against the law of nations, and tax eva­sion. These are the only crimes the fed­eral gov­ern­ment is autho­rized to pun­ish by the Con­sti­tu­tion. All other crimes remain the exclu­sive con­sti­tu­tional domain of the States. This was done to pre­vent the fed­eral gov­ern­ment from grow­ing large enough to be a threat to the sov­er­eignty of the States. If there were more fed­eral crimes then the fed­eral gov­ern­ment would need a fed­eral police force, fed­eral pris­ons, and a very large fed­eral court sys­tem. Unfor­tu­nately the fed­eral gov­ern­ment has ignored the Con­sti­tu­tion and seized so much gov­ern­ment func­tions from the States that it now has all of this. The fed­eral gov­ern­ment now dwarfs the States and has become a direct threat to the sov­er­eignty of the States.

It is wrong to say that abor­tion is a states’ rights issue. It is more accu­rate to describe abor­tion as one of the vast major­ity of poten­tial crimes that States have the author­ity to define and pre­scribe pun­ish­ment, while the fed­eral gov­ern­ment does not. Here is how James Madi­son described the rela­tion­ship between State and fed­eral gov­ern­ment when he wrote Fed­er­al­ist paper num­ber 45

The pow­ers del­e­gated by the pro­posed Con­sti­tu­tion to the fed­eral gov­ern­ment are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State gov­ern­ments are numer­ous and indef­i­nite. The for­mer will be exer­cised prin­ci­pally on exter­nal objects, as war, peace, nego­ti­a­tion, and for­eign com­merce; with which last the power of tax­a­tion will, for the most part, be connected.

The pow­ers reserved to the sev­eral States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordi­nary course of affairs, con­cern the lives, lib­er­ties, and prop­er­ties of the peo­ple, and the inter­nal order, improve­ment, and pros­per­ity of the State.

This prin­ci­ple, which is called fed­er­al­ism, is enshrined in the 10th Amend­ment. The fed­eral gov­ern­ment is granted only a very lim­ited num­ber of gov­ern­ment pow­ers which are clearly spelled out in the Con­sti­tu­tion. The States are denied an even more lim­ited num­ber of pow­ers which are also clearly spelled out. All remain­ing pow­ers are retained by the States or the peo­ple. The power to define crimes such as mur­der is not granted to the fed­eral gov­ern­ment nor is it denied to the States; there­fore it remains with the States. The same holds true for the power to out­law abor­tion and other sim­i­lar prac­tices. Jus­tice Harry Blackmun’s opin­ion for Roe v Wade vio­lated the prin­ci­ple of fed­er­al­ism and the 10th Amend­ment. Here are two excerpts from the opin­ion which reveal the twisted logic used by Jus­tice Blackmun.

The prin­ci­pal thrust of appellant’s attack on the Texas statutes is that they improp­erly invade a right, said to be pos­sessed by the preg­nant woman, to choose to ter­mi­nate her preg­nancy. Appel­lant would dis­cover this right in the con­cept of per­sonal “lib­erty” embod­ied in the Four­teenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause; or in per­sonal, mar­i­tal, famil­ial, and sex­ual pri­vacy said to be pro­tected by the Bill of Rights or its penumbras

This right of pri­vacy, whether it be founded in the Four­teenth Amendment’s con­cept of per­sonal lib­erty and restric­tions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the Dis­trict Court deter­mined, in the Ninth Amendment’s reser­va­tion of rights to the peo­ple, is broad enough to encom­pass a woman’s deci­sion whether or not to ter­mi­nate her pregnancy.

Accord­ing to Jus­tice Black­mun, the Supreme Court can over­rule the States on abor­tion because the due process clause of the 14th Amend­ment incor­po­rated every sin­gle right included in the Bill of Rights down to the States. This would shock those that wrote and rat­i­fied the 14th Amend­ment. The Bill of Rights never extended to the States, each State has its own Bill of Rights. The 14th Amend­ment due process clause is an exact dupli­cate of the due process clause of the 5th Amend­ment. It extended the pro­tec­tion from only that one clause of the Bill of Rights down to the State level. Not much was writ­ten about the due process clause when the Bill of Rights was writ­ten because this con­cept was uni­ver­sally under­stood. It dates back to the Manga Carta and was an inte­gral part of Eng­lish Com­mon Law. Here is what William Black­stone had to say when he wrote Com­men­taries on the Laws of England

The law of Eng­land regards, asserts, and pre­serves the per­sonal lib­erty of indi­vid­u­als. This per­sonal lib­erty con­sists in the power of loco­mo­tion, of chang­ing sit­u­a­tion, or remov­ing one’s per­son to what­so­ever place one’s own incli­na­tion may direct; with­out impris­on­ment or restraint, unless by due course of law.

The due process clause pre­vents the gov­ern­ment from tak­ing away your free­dom, in other words, lock­ing you up, with­out going through a for­mal legal pro­ce­dure. It was meant to ensure every­one has a fair trial, not allow abor­tions. The writ­ers of the 14th Amend­ment never intended that this Amend­ment would allow the Supreme Court to over­turn State laws pre­vent­ing abor­tion. All 36 States out­lawed abor­tion before this amend­ment was rat­i­fied in 1868. It was not until 1973 that Jus­tice Black­mun used this amend­ment to over­turn a Texas law.

Every State has a moral oblig­a­tion to crim­i­nal­ize abor­tion because no one has a right to com­mit mur­der. Every indi­vid­ual is endowed by God with inalien­able rights at con­cep­tion. The most impor­tant of these rights are life and lib­erty. Abor­tion steals the life of the unborn child and robs it of a life time of decid­ing for itself. Lib­erty is the free­dom to do what you want as long as you do not hurt oth­ers and do not inter­fere with the rights of oth­ers. Because abor­tion vio­lates both prin­ci­ples, no one has a right to an abor­tion. Pres­i­dent Trump needs to nom­i­nate a Supreme Court Jus­tice that will over­turn Roe v Wade and we need to work to make sure abor­tion is out­lawed in every State.

I firmly believe that abortion is murder.  It is murder of the most helpless and innocent.  I also believe that life begins at conception.  At the time of the writing and ratification of the Constitution every State treated abortion as murder, relying on English Common law, rather than a formal State law.  Abortion is not mentioned in the US Constitution nor is it defined as a crime.  That is of no significance when it comes to allowing the States to criminalize abortion.  Murder is not defined in the Constitution nor is a punishment prescribed, yet murder is illegal in all 50 States.  The only crimes defined by the US Constitution are treason, counterfeiting, piracy and felonies committed on the high seas, offenses against the law of nations, and tax evasion.  These are the only crimes the federal government is authorized to punish by the Constitution.  All other crimes remain the exclusive constitutional domain of the States.  This was done to prevent the federal government from growing large enough to be a threat to the sovereignty of the States.  If there were more federal crimes then the federal government would need a federal police force, federal prisons, and a very large federal court system.  Unfortunately the federal government has ignored the Constitution and seized so much government functions from the States that it now has all of this.  The federal government now dwarfs the States and has become a direct threat to the sovereignty of the States.

It is wrong to say that abortion is a states’ rights issue.  It is more accurate to describe abortion as one of the vast majority of potential crimes that States have the authority to define and prescribe punishment, while the federal government does not.  Here is how James Madison described the relationship between State and federal government when he wrote Federalist paper number 45

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.

The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.

This principle, which is called federalism, is enshrined in the 10th Amendment.  The federal government is granted only a very limited number of government powers which are clearly spelled out in the Constitution.  The States are denied an even more limited number of powers which are also clearly spelled out.  All remaining powers are retained by the States or the people.  The power to define crimes such as murder is not granted to the federal government nor is it denied to the States; therefore it remains with the States.  The same holds true for the power to outlaw abortion and other similar practices.   Justice Harry Blackmun’s opinion for Roe v Wade violated the principle of federalism and the 10th Amendment.   Here are two excerpts from the opinion which reveal the twisted logic used by Justice Blackmun.

The principal thrust of appellant’s attack on the Texas statutes is that they improperly invade a right, said to be possessed by the pregnant woman, to choose to terminate her pregnancy. Appellant would discover this right in the concept of personal “liberty” embodied in the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause; or in personal, marital, familial, and sexual privacy said to be protected by the Bill of Rights or its penumbras

This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.

According to Justice Blackmun, the Supreme Court can overrule the States on abortion because the due process clause of the 14th Amendment incorporated every single right included in the Bill of Rights down to the States.  This would shock those that wrote and ratified the 14th Amendment.  The Bill of Rights never extended to the States, each State has its own Bill of Rights.  The 14th Amendment due process clause is an exact duplicate of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment.  It extended the protection from only that one clause of the Bill of Rights down to the State level.  Not much was written about the due process clause when the Bill of Rights was written because this concept was universally understood.  It dates back to the Manga Carta and was an integral part of English Common Law.  Here is what William Blackstone had to say when he wrote Commentaries on the Laws of England

The law of England regards, asserts, and preserves the personal liberty of individuals. This personal liberty consists in the power of locomotion, of changing situation, or removing one’s person to whatsoever place one’s own inclination may direct; without imprisonment or restraint, unless by due course of law.

The due process clause prevents the government from taking away your freedom, in other words, locking you up, without going through a formal legal procedure.  It was meant to ensure everyone has a fair trial, not allow abortions.  The writers of the 14th Amendment never intended that this Amendment would allow the Supreme Court to overturn State laws preventing abortion.  All 36 States outlawed abortion before this amendment was ratified in 1868.  It was not until 1973 that Justice Blackmun used this amendment to overturn a Texas law.

Every State has a moral obligation to criminalize abortion because no one has a right to commit murder.  Every individual is endowed by God with inalienable rights at conception.  The most important of these rights are life and liberty.  Abortion steals the life of the unborn child and robs it of a life time of deciding for itself.  Liberty is the freedom to do what you want as long as you do not hurt others and do not interfere with the rights of others.  Because abortion violates both principles, no one has a right to an abortion.  President Trump needs to nominate a Supreme Court Justice that will overturn Roe v Wade and we need to work to make sure abortion is outlawed in every State.