- BitsBlog - https://bitsblog.com -

Slow Joe on Roe V. Wade

Slow Joe, b/k/a Joseph Biden, claimed to have instructed constitutional law. IF that is indeed the case, Slow Joe, either does not understand the Constitution, or if he once did he as forgotten:

(CNSNews.com [1]) – Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden said on Monday that if a conservative Supreme Court moved to overrule the Roe v. Wade – the court’s 1973 decision that legalized abortion – he as president would work for legislation making the right to an abortion the law of the land.

The key to understanding Roe is not the conjectured right of privacy, but rather the concept of personhood, and the parent of Roe is Scott v. Sandford(Dred Scott). Roger Taney made no reference to privacy. Rather, rightly or wrongly, Taney assumed that Scott had no rights(personhood) that need be protect, and proceed to treat Scott as property of Sandford.

Indeed the concept of personhood is never defined in the Constitution and only mentioned, but not defined, the amendments. The power to enumerate rights not stated in the Constitution falls to the several states. It is the several states which have to constitutional power to define personhood, not the federal government.

Prior to Roe v. Wade(1973) abortion was legal in some states, illegal in others. In other words, Roe did not legalize abortion. Rather is forbade states from making abortion illegal. The Supreme Court denied the several states their constitutional authority deriving from the Tenth to define personhood.

Fast forward to Slow Joe’s campaign, and he fields an abortion question

“Number one,” began Biden, “we don’t know exactly what she[Amy Coney Barrett] will do, although the expectation is that she may very well move to over – overview – overrule Roe. And the only thing – the only responsible response to that would be to pass legislation making Roe the law of the land.”

“That’s what I would do.”

Neither Biden nor his questioner used the word “abortion.”

First abiding by the Constitution, the Court lacks the authority to make abortion illegal. All the court do is to return the power to decide the issue to the several states. Second, if the court rules that the federal government lacks to power to deprive the several states of their Tenth Amendment, that would prohibit both the court and the congress from interference with the constitutional power of the several states. Even if the would be President claimed to have taught constitutional law.