If something is SETTLED LAW (Roe vs Wade) then the only reason to change it would be partisan politics right?
Isn't SCOTUS supposed to be apolitical? Aren't Justices of the Supreme Court SUPPOSED TO BE UNBIASED AND FOLLOW THE RULE OF LAW? If anything is SETTLED LAW shouldn't they defend and support it, not abort it?
Well first of all no one is unbiased. And Roe vs. Wade issue is very emotional for many people not because of political partisanship but because of what they see as right and wrong. So they believe there should not be any U.S. statutes or laws which permit murder. Many people were unhappy with that decision back then and still are because of that.
Remember, the US has a history of overturning "settled law": Slavery Women's Rights Civil Rights Movement
Quite honestly, Roe v Wade was not a matter for federal law. It should have fallen under Article 10 - powers left to the states. Thus, in even ruling on the matter, the Supreme Court did NOT "follow the rule of law".
Funny you should bring that up m'dear. States Rights. I'm pretty sure the super don of john wants to control and decide everything for everyone everywhere all the time and so he does not recognize any rights but his. Kinda sad but then the ones who elected him don't seem to mind his thinking for them and deciding for them. I guess thinking is hard work and some folks gladly shift the burden to others. Sheesh. Thank you for you r reply Walt and Happy Wednesday! :)
Walt O'Reagun 