In October, political surprises are common. This one arrived in May, in the dead of night, no less. The shocking leak of the Supreme Court draft decision overturning the constitutional right to abortion has already accomplished its primary goal. It gives Democrats something to run on this fall other than Joe Biden’s dismal record.
Never mind that the leak was likely a crime, with Chief Justice John Roberts calling it a “betrayal” and ordering an investigation.
Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate, called it an attack on the Court’s independence, saying it is “yet another escalation in the radical left’s ongoing campaign to bully and intimidate federal judges and substitute mob rule for the rule of law.”
According to the widely respected SCOTUSblog, “this leak is the gravest, most unforgivable sin,” and it will destroy trust among the justices and staff.
True — but don’t expect a single Democrat to condemn the leak or the leaker. Quite the contrary. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and they embraced the draft’s contents without hesitation as an opportunity to rally their disgruntled supporters around a new flag.
Forget about inflation, open borders, and the murderous crime surge in Ukraine; instead, take a look at this gleaming new object. And become enraged as hell.
Even President Biden roused himself to appear in front of reporters, and while much of what he said was half-sentence gibberish, he did manage to state unequivocally that the leaked draft “goes way overboard” in demolish Roe v. Wade.
Majority Leader Chuck Schumer had a bounce in his step as he vowed to force the Senate to vote on turning the gist of Roe into federal law. “We will vote to protect a woman’s right to choose, and every American is going to see which side every senator stands on,” Schumer said, then added that the “rights of one hundred million women are now on the ballot.”
He’s doing it again, exaggerating. Many women oppose abortion, and Schumer is unlikely to get a majority of senators to support his plan, let alone the 60 votes needed to break the filibuster.
Furthermore, due to existing state laws, the procedure would remain legal in many states, which is precisely the point of the draft opinion — that abortion rights should have always been decided by voters in each state and their representatives.
Nonetheless, Schumer’s outlandish claim demonstrates how politicians are experimenting with the most radical positions as they find themselves in uncharted territory. For the first time in 50 years, there is genuine uncertainty about how abortion will play out in the upcoming midterm elections and in the long run.
In fact, the problem can be viewed from both sides. Most Americans, including myself, support abortion rights, but they also recognize the need for some kind of restriction.