Let’s tear the USSC’s so-called constitutional rights to privacy and abortion to pieces.
To begin with, what the Court wrongly ignored when it used its magic glasses to find abortion and privacy rights in the Constitution is this. Given the Constitution is silent about privacy and abortion, the 10th A. automatically reserves government power to regulate these issues to the states, not the federal government. Indeed, special-interest justices “inadvertently overlooked” that the Article V state majority uniquely has the power to amend privacy and abortion rights into the Constitution at its pleasure as the states have done for our other basic rights.
So right off the bat, privacy and abortion rights were established by outcome-driven justices who wrongly legislated these so-called rights from the bench, scandalously ignoring the unique, Article V powers of the states to legislate such rights. Indeed, let’s take a look at how the Court perverted lawmaker’s intentions for the 14th A., wrongly using that amendment to apply the constitutionally non-existent rights of privacy and abortion to the states.
John Bingham, the main author of Sec. 1 of the 14th A., had officially clarified before the HoR that the 14th A. applied only enumerated constitutional rights to the states. See for yourself.
“Mr. Speaker, this House may safely follow the example of the makers of the Constitution and the builders of the Republic, by passing laws for enforcing all the privileges and immunities of the United States as guaranteed by the amended Constitution and expressly enumerated in the Constitution.” –John Bingham, Congressional Globe (1871) http://tinyurl.com/y3ne4n
So based on Bingham’s words, the only way that the USSC could have applied abortion rights, for example, to the states through the 14th A. is if the states had amended the Constitution prior to Roe v. Wade to expressly protect abortion rights, IMO.
Also, in stark contrast to the Court finding abortion rights in the “wild card” 9th A., note that when Bingham clarified the scope and purpose of the 14th A. for the HoR, he read only the first eight amendments as examples of constitutional statutes containing rights which the 14th applied to the states, ignoring the 9 A. altogether.
Again, the USSC’s so-called rights to privacy and abortion are bogus constitutional rights, IMO. These fictitious rights were established by corrupt justices who not only scandalously usurped legislative powers to establish basic rights, but usurped state legislative powers, breaching the Founder’s division of federal and state government powers.
What a mess! :^(
