Court Overturns Roe v Wade
The US Supreme Court’s decision, late last night Australian time, to overturn Roe v Wade is monumental.
The decision reverses 50 years of insistence that the Constitution guarantees the right to an abortion. As of Friday just gone, each US state will be free to decide its own abortion laws.
I want to supply readers with an easy-to-understand summary of what the US Supreme Court decided yesterday. That way, when you’re talking to friends or whatever, you will have a reasonable handle on it.
First, some background.
Bloody History
Abortion was legalised in 1973 when the Supreme Court ruled that a “right of privacy” included “a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”
More than 63 million babies have been aborted since that judgement.
One in five pregnancies was terminated in 2020.
Weirdly, killing unborn babies went from “safe, legal and rare” to “sacred”.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi described abortion as “sacred ground”.
Planned Parenthood insisted that “Abortion is sacred.”
How did a culture go from believing life was sacred to believing that abortion was sacred?
Violent and Twisted
If abortion was “sacred”, then any attempt at limiting it was seen as sacrilege.
That is why pro-abortion activists started attacking Catholic churches and firebombing Christian pregnancy centres when a draft of the Court’s judgement was leaked a month ago.
An attempt was made to murder Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Protestors have been camped outside Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s house.
Activists not only denied the humanity of the unborn child, but they corrupted the relationship between the mother and the unborn child.
They referred to the unborn child as an “embryonic guest” or a “parasite leeching off the host”.
If the unborn child is a parasite rather than a human being, and if the woman is an unwilling host rather than a mother, all the easier for pro-abortionists to live with themselves.
Unconstitutional
When you consider 50 years of history and all the histrionics of the pro abortion lobby, the decision to overturn Roe v Wade is incredible. The Supreme Court justices are incredibly courageous.
So what did the Court rule?
The Court ruled that“the Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision.”
The Court ruled that, prior to Roe v Wade, there “was no support in American law for a constitutional right to obtain an abortion.”
In other words, the Court ruled that the famous Roe v Wade ruling that legalised abortion, was wrong.
“Roe was on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was decided,” the Justices wrote.
The Court continued:
“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division.”
Dissenting Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan argued that the Court now “says that from the very moment of fertilization, a woman has no rights to speak of.”
The majority of Justices rightly dismissed this rather hysterical assertion.
Pregnant women have the same rights as everyone else. What they don’t have is the right to kill another human being.
The ruling does not mean that abortion is illegal. Rather, it means returning “the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
In other words, abortion is no longer considered a Constitutional right. Each state will be free to make its own laws on abortion according to the will of the people expressed through their elected representatives.
This is an enormous win for those of us who believe that human life, rather than abortion, is sacred.
___
Originally published at The James Macpherson Report.
Subscribe to his Substack here for daily witty commentary.
Photo: Sky News
4 Comments
Leave A Comment
Recent Articles:
18 September 2026
4.4 MINS
Up to 10,000 rallied in Sydney for a ban on sex-selective abortion. Twenty-four hours later, the NSW Legislative Council defeated John Ruddick's bill 21–16. The fight, says Dr Joanna Howe, is just beginning.
18 September 2026
3.5 MINS
Brothers Luke and Joel Smallbone have become one of the world's most loved Christian pop acts. As For King & Country, they have won four Grammys, 15 GMA Dove Awards and billions of song streams. And today they releasing their latest album.
18 September 2026
4.9 MINS
The government's $75 million deradicalisation program isn't working — and some wannabe terrorists have left more radical. So it's announced a new plan — which forbids identifying what's doing the radicalising.
18 September 2026
2.1 MINS
"Trans women are women." Repeat it enough and it starts to feel true. That's not an argument — it's a propaganda technique. And Australia's courts are now enforcing gender ideology.
18 September 2026
5.2 MINS
Nike picked a fight with half its customers, endorsed a man in a sports bra, and defended China's slave labor. Now it's bleeding $200 billion in market value. Turns out customers have a choice.
17 September 2026
3.9 MINS
The NFL landed in Australia with a flyover, celebrities, and a 100,000-strong crowd. What caught the internet's attention was something the MCG hasn't seen much of lately: unashamed, public Christian faith.
17 September 2026
5.2 MINS
Surrogacy is often discussed through the hopes of adults seeking children. Meet the woman, born to a surrogate herself, who says the debate should begin instead with the experiences of surrogate mothers and children separated at birth.
The whole house of cards about to fall?
https://fortune.com/2022/06/24/justice-clarence-thomas-gay-rights-contraception-reconsider-scotus-abortion-roe-wade/
While the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade was written by Justice Samuel Alito, a concurring opinion in favor of the conservative majority by Justice Clarence Thomas raises fears that rulings protecting contraception and same-sex marriage could be overruled as well in the near term.
“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents,” Thomas wrote, pointing to Griswold v. Connecticut (contraception), Lawrence (same-sex marriage), and Obergefell (same-sex marriage). “Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous,’ we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”
“Pregnant women have the same rights as everyone else. What they don’t have is the right to kill another human being.”…Amen James.
It occurs to me that this principle might also be applied to the men who choose to become women n women who do likewise. In effect they attempt to kill who they are when they medically transition. They cant of course achieve their goal regardless of what they subject themselves to but they must live with the tragic outcome.
James, this is great news! Thank you for putting the facts of history before us, it is so easy these days for us to gloss over the ‘history’ and simply live in the ‘present’. I am excited that each state can now move on the abortion issue, I think that this whole thing, lifts again, the miracle of creation and that we are not ‘accidents’ but ‘designs’. Well done!
Sixty-three million lives have been destroyed in America alone. There must have been countless others throughout the world. The only time when a foetus can legitimately be destroyed is in the case of an ectopic pregnancy which threatens the life of the mother. In this case the part of the fallopian tube that has the growing foetus in it can be removed. If it was not removed the mother would haemorrhage and die together with the foetus. In all other cases it is nothing less than the murder of a life that could potentially grow up to be a gift to the mother and the world.