The decision of the Supreme Court, on June 24, to suppress the constitutional right to aborting the White House, which, for lack of super-majority in the Senate, cannot register this right in law.
by
A 10-year-old girl lives in Ohio, a state where no abortion beyond six weeks is authorized. This is what the law says, entered into force immediately after the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, on June 24, removing the constitutional right to abort. This 10 -year -old girl was raped. She got pregnant. For a few days, she exceeded the authorized time. It was therefore necessary to drive it in Indiana to proceed to the voluntary termination of pregnancy (abortion). “I cannot imagine something more extreme than that,” said Joe Biden on Friday July 8, when signing a symbolic presidential decree, aimed at defending reproductive rights.
Aware of frustration and anger prevailing in the Democratic ranks, the American president insisted on this striking example to marry these feelings instead of being the secondary target. “We cannot allow a Supreme Court, working in connection with the extremist elements of the Republican Party, to remove freedoms and our personal autonomy, he said. The choice we are confronted with as the nation is that between the dominant current and extreme current. Between going from front or back. “
But his intervention did not raise the discomfort. The White House seemed to be unarmed by the Supreme Court, while a draft of the decision had leaked two months earlier, leaving little doubt about the chosen orientation.
Since then, the administration is satisfied with a magisterium of indignation, due to political limitations well identified in the Senate. In the absence of super-majority (60 votes out of 100), impossible to register the right to abort in law. And to remove this requirement to bring together a super-majority, it would still be necessary that the fifty democratic senators accept; two are missing.
fierce legal battle
The administration also rejected the suggestion of a state of public health emergency, claimed by certain organizations for the defense of reproductive rights. Argument retained: Such a declaration would not unlock decisive prerogatives or substantial means. In the same way, the White House did not resume the idea of organizing abortive care on federal terrains – as military bases – being in the most repressive states. This would have had very complex ramifications in terms of criminal liability for participants.
Consequently, “the fastest path available”, according to Joe Biden, is a vast mobilization during the mid-term elections in November. “I hope and I strongly believe that women will present themselves in record numbers to use the rights which have been removed by the Court,” he added, insisting on the absolute emergency in the face of the reactionary wave in Republican states. A fierce legal battle is engaged in the whole country to contest the application of “trigger laws”, the legislations ready for employment which only awaited the decision of the Supreme Court to enter into force.
You have 41.48% of this article to read. The continuation is reserved for subscribers.