Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking
Individual states are passing laws in relation to abortion. Therefore the legal competence lies with the individual states. It is the Supreme Court that has imposed limits on what they can decide(ie they can't have a blanket ban), not the Federal government. If the Federal government had legal competence on these matters, then they would've already shut down the possibility of the individual states having their own restrictions.
With the Roe vs Wade decision, not even the Federal government could overturn it. How is that democratic?
|
The US Constitution states, in terms, that government may not unreasonably impinge on the liberty of the individual. The Supreme Court’s opinion is that this means neither federal nor state government may pass laws banning abortion, as this would represent an unreasonable infringement of a woman’s liberty.
Your argument is illogical. You’re claiming that states are trying to do something, therefore they have the competence to do it, whereas federal government hasn’t tried to stop them, therefore does not have the competence to stop them. However there are a range of other possible explanations for the actions of the states and the federal government. In particular there would be no value in the federal government legislating on abortion when it is a controversial issue, and the Supreme Court has already ruled on it.
The constitution is held a couple of steps back from being able to be changed by simple legislation because it is supposed to be the defining document of a nation state, not a reflection of temporary political preferences. Nevertheless there are democratic procedures available to change it, and those who interpret it are appointed by others who have been democratically elected. In fact it is the shifting political climate in the USA that has now brought it to the point where the Supreme Court position on abortion might now change.