It is shocking that someone in the enclave of the Supreme Court would have taken an extraordinary step to highlight a draft conclusion that kills Rowe v. Wade and returns women to the age of hangers. But what is not shocking at all is the draft conclusion itself.
Did we really expect something else? It’s not as if Republican right-wing and censored evangelicals, intervening moralists, and misogynists haven’t shown for decades exactly who they are and what they plan to do. That wouldn’t be the case if Mitch McConnell hadn’t signaled his intentions when he stole a seat in the Supreme Court from a qualified Obama candidate.
It’s not as if Donald Trump didn’t make it clear like the day he promised to expose Rowe’s three or four enemies to the court. It is not as if Republicans have declared again and again, election after election, that they considered “the sanctity of innocent human life” (introduced in the 1980 GOP platform) and the composition of the Supreme Court intertwined at the first level. voting issues.
They played a long game, and now she is finally ready to pay off. They didn’t care if most Americans were on their side about criminalizing abortion (most Americans are still not on their side) because they are accountable only to God or some supposedly superior person. They were purposeful, purposeful and ruthless – unlike the often too lazy and inconspicuous majority who advocated choice.
Let’s talk about this majority for choice. Let’s put the blame for the impending anti-utopia after Rowe where it belongs.
I will spare you from a long history dating back to 2000. When George W. Bush ran for president, he got engaged and defeated the Christian right with clear promises to create a right-wing court against Rowe. (Judge Alita, who wrote the draft opinion appointed by Bush).
Bush’s promises were applauded by conservative activists such as William Crystal, who told me in 1999 that the abolition of abortion rights was a top priority and that “the greatest influence of the next president on domestic policy will be in appointments to higher courts.” In response, Democrats and progressives hardly mentioned the court in that campaign.
Rewind for 10 years. Enraged by Barack Obama’s presidential victory, Republicans – always thinking ahead – have launched a massive effort to seize state legislatures in the 2010 “off-year” election to undermine Rowe’s state restrictions. In response,
Democrats and progressives have allocated comparable meager money and money to these state races. The result: a red tsunami at the bottom.
Did Democrats and progressives learn a lesson and realize that the election “out of the year” was quite important? No way. When the next round took place, in 2014, the turnout of the Democratic Party was again anemic. The result: Republicans seized control of the Senate, and McConnell, the new majority leader, was given the right to block Obama candidate Merrick Garland to such an extent that he even refused to hear him.
Did Democrats and Progressives respond with a constant targeted attack on this stolen place, using it as a springboard for the 2016 presidential race to become a referendum on the future composition of the Supreme Court? No way. Even after Hillary Clinton directly warned what would happen to Roe if she lost: “Our next president can appoint as many as three or four judges in the next four years … That’s why this election is so important.”
Unfortunately, much more important was the feeling that Hillary was not clean or pretty enough, or her voice was too “piercing”, or there must have been something sinister in her letters.
Here is the big difference between the two guerrilla camps: Republicans and conservatives of all stripes had all sorts of legitimate fears about Trump, but they remained focused on their ultimate judicial mission: to deny women bodily autonomy. Such thinking was anathema to liberal litmus tests.
Indeed, when the 2016 exit polls were published, the damage was done: one-fifth of all voters called the Supreme Court the “most important” factor in its decision to vote – and among these people, Trump overtook Hillary by 15 percent.
Here we are paying for decades of apathy – we deliberately do not see the planned theft of women’s rights to privacy, which is happening in plain sight. The angry reaction of Democrats to the leaked draft opinion is so tedious precisely because Democrats are by nature so tedious to react.
Joe Lockhart, an election supporter and former spokesman for Bill Clinton, wrote on Twitter: “We have an election ahead of us to do something.” That’s okay as far as it goes. Of course, it would be good if the lazy people in favor of the election, en masse resigned and “did something” to rid us of Republicans at all levels in the upcoming by-elections.
I will believe when I see. And it’s so hard for Democrats to wait until the Republican Party’s long game is almost over, and toss Hail-Mary as the clock is over.
Opinion author Dick Polman, a veteran national political commentator from Philadelphia and a residency writer at the University of Pennsylvania, writes in DickPolman.net. His work appears on Mondays on the Capital-Star comment page. Readers can write to him at [email protected].