End of Roe Restores Precedent

Selwyn Duke

John M. Hill replies:

Federal laws always Trump state laws. Roe v Wade was brought against Texas. The case was brought to legalize abortion in states and to never discriminate against women’s rights to make a choice the Judges interpreted the 14th amendment so they used the Constitution as precedent not their biases

Selwyn retorts:

That's incorrect, John, but a common misconception. Federal laws do NOT always trump state laws. The Supremacy Clause states that federal laws made "in pursuance of" the Constitution are supreme. People tend to forget those three words. In other words, unconstitutional federal laws are without merit.


And Tim adds:

Selwyn is exactly right. There is Federalism which says that states are coequal with the Federal government in terms of power. I would direct you to the Tenth Amendment which vests all power in the States or the People except those specifically enumerated in the Constitution. Abortion isn't enumerated in the Constitution.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

The Tenth Amendment makes it clear abortion is a state matter and not a Federal one.

BTW the Supremacy Clause only applies where there is an open conflict between state and federal law - Constitutional Federal law. That means it must fall within the enumerated powers. Read Article I Section 8 of the Constitution if you are confused as to what powers the Constitution grants the Federal government.

Abortion isn't one of them.

On the other hand, the baby is being denied the right to life and given no due process. There is no hearing before an abortion. No lawyer defending the child's right to exist.

Who is violating the Constitution?

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:26 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 350 words, total size 2 kb.