Going to go out on a limb here, but I’m pretty sure the Court would be seeing this differently if it was ruling on cocks.
~
Rusty coathangers are not what I’m talking about. Yes, women have used coathangers. Knitting needles. Weight-lifting. Jumping up and down. When they are pregnant and don’t want to be – it’s the wrong man, the wrong time, the wrong place – they will do what they need to do to abort. Desperation is what I’m talking about. The Supreme Court can overturn Roe v. Wade, and probably will, but women will have abortions. They had illegal ones before Roe and they will again, if that’s what they must do.
When young women need abortions, will they have them safely, legally, in a sterile setting, performed by a trained professional whose reputation they can check? Whose name they know? Who will follow up afterward if something goes wrong? Or will they be forced to resort to the harrowing means sought by their mothers and older sisters? Will they be made to feel like criminals or – as some in the anti-abortion movement would have it – actually become criminals? Linda Rocawich, Before Roe v. Wade, After Roe Is Reversed: Desperation. The Progressive, January 1992.
~
So now you know. The Supreme court will rule on restrictive abortion law in time for Election Day. Ironically, this announcement, which fast-tracks the inevitable gutting of Roe v. Wade, counts as a pro-choice victory: Abortion, the hope is, will be thrown into the political arena, where pro-choicers hold a three-to-one majority. Given the current makeup of the Court, pro-choice groups did well to force a showdown. Still, that strategy entails major risks.
It is fashionable in some policy quarters to deride Roe and to urge pro-choicers to trust the political process. But it is the Supreme court, historically, that has been the last line of defense for hotly contested civil liberties. No one who cherishes a right would wish to see it voted up or down every four years, or worse, subjected to fifty annual recertifications by state pols elected for their views on taxes or highway repairs. Editorial: The Court’s Wake-Up Call. The Nation, February 10, 1992.
~
~
Supreme Court seems inclined to uphold Mississippi abortion law that would undermine Roe v. Wade
