- ‘Operation Normandy’ set to send 3,500 volunteers to border to ‘stop an invasion’
- Netanyahu’s spokesman: Safe to fly to Israel
- Oregon vandals smear cars with doughnuts, pastries, chocolate bars
- Obama’s ‘Katrina moment’ leaves his favorability factor at 42 percent
- Feds tout nearly 200 arrests, $625K in seized cash in Texas border crackdown
- Joy Behar: Sarah Palin should be ‘turning letters over on some game show’
- Rhino poacher in South Africa sentenced to 77 years in jail
- John Kerry defies FAA and flies to Israel to talk peace
- Beretta leaves Maryland over gun laws, heads for Tennessee
- Neal Boortz defends Hillary Clinton for representing child rapist
Supreme Court’s abortion overreach
Question of the Day
All government officials in the United States pledge to uphold the Constitution as written. These oaths affirm that the rule of law is superior to the rule of any person or group.
This principle requires that each branch of government act only within its stated constitutional authority. The courts may have power to rule that a law is unconstitutional and void, but do not have authority to substitute a new law for the old.
Currently, legislators in Iowa are planning to introduce a bill that will ban abortion after 20 weeks except where the mother's life is in jeopardy. Abortion advocates claim that this would be unconstitutional because it departs from the viability rule set out by the United States Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade (1973).
When the Supreme Court ruled that the Texas abortion statute was unconstitutional, it should have stopped right there. But the court went on to legislate a new trimester system of rules for the whole nation to follow. It did not have constitutional authority to substitute these rules as new law. It should have been left to the legislature of each state to craft its own new abortion law.
In his Roe dissent, Justice Byron White wrote that the court had "constitutionally disentitled" the people and the legislatures of the states from their right to weigh and balance the relative rights of the fetus and the mother.
By enacting abortion rules, the U.S. Supreme Court exceeded its constitutional authority. Therefore, the rules should be voided and not allowed to stand in the way of the new abortion law proposed in Iowa.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
TWT Video Picks
Retailer pays a price for getting too close to Obama
Get Breaking Alerts
- David Perdue defeats Jack Kingston in Georgia Republican Senate primary runoff
- IRS seeks help destroying another 3,200 computer hard drives
- CARSON: Costco and the perils of mixing politics and business
- Beretta moving to Tennessee over Maryland gun laws
- D.C. appeals panel deals big blow to Obamacare subsidies
- 'Straight White Guy Festival' supposedly set for Ohio park
- DEACE: How to go from civil rights icon to bigot in one quote
- EDITORIAL: A new witch hunt in Salem
- House task force to recommend National Guard on border, faster deportations
- PRUDEN: A deadly enemy within exacerbating immigration crisis