OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
Missouri GOP Sen. Josh Hawley says that Roe v. Wade is the greatest injustice of our lifetime and that the U.S. Supreme Court has an opportunity to correct it.
During an interview with Breitbart, Hawley said that after the first day of oral arguments that Roe v. Wade is “very much in play.”
Hawley predicted the Supreme Court would rule 6-3 in favor of upholding the Mississippi law, which could be the case that overturns Roe.
Hawley explained, “It would mean the reaching of a landmark goal that I mean, frankly, I have to say just personally, that Roe is one of the reasons that the major reason that I went into politics, and I think that’s true for many, many other people. That’s one of the major reasons I was interested in the law. And this is the greatest injustice of our lifetimes.”
“I think you’d see real deliberation for the first time in 50 years because the public would actually get to weigh in and their voices would actually matter,” he added.
Hawley said, “I just have to say that someone who believes that that row is one of the worst decisions ever handed down by the Supreme Court, I think it would be a monumental moral landmark and reverse a great injustice.”
“And after listening to the argument, I believe this could be the case that finally reverses the great injustice of Roe. It may all come down to Amy Barrett,” Hawley wrote Wednesday.
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday in the most important abortion case in nearly three decades.
The Supreme Court is currently reviewing a Mississippi law that would ban nearly all abortions after 15 weeks.
Justice Clarence Thomas asked a pointed question during the hearing that should have pro-abortion liberals worried.
” Does a mother have a right to ingest drugs and harm a pre-viable baby? Can the state bring child neglect charges against the mother?“ he asked.
The attorney representing Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the organization attempting to overturn the law, had this to say: “That’s not what this case is about, but a woman has a right to make choices about her body.”
Thomas has long been a target of liberal pro-abortion activists, especially given he’s arguably one of the most pro-life justices to ever sit on the bench.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh might be the deciding votes on the case.
CNN reported that Roberts and Kavanaugh might be looking at a “middle ground,” where they may not support completely reversing Roe v Wade:
Roberts suggested the court could look at Mississippi’s 15-week law as a new viability standard, rather than Roe and Casey, which is over 20 weeks. And Kavanaugh, meanwhile, has asked to confirm that Mississippi isn’t asking the court to outright prohibit abortion, a way to say it’s not overturning Roe while limiting access.
Kavanaugh asked another set of questions suggesting he is inclined to rule with Mississippi and even go as far as reverse Roe.
In broad strokes, he sums up Mississippi’s argument asking the court to interpret the Constitution as neutral on abortion and to return the issue to state or Congress. He asked Rikelman to respond.
Then he asked a question about stare decisis, ticking off several “consequential” decisions — including on school segregation, voting rights, and business regulations — where the court overturned precedent.
CNN also noted how Kavanaugh may be open to limiting abortion:
Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked a question that seems aimed at the arguments made by abortion-rights advocates that a decision overturning Roe v. Wade would be a step towards the Supreme Court eventually issuing a decision that would outlaw abortion nationwide.
Kavanaugh asked Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart to confirm that his state is not making an argument that the court should prohibit abortion.
Mississippi is arguing that the Constitution is silent or neutral on the abortion question. Kavanaugh asked Stewart to confirm, which he did.
Kavanaugh suggested that a majority of states – or at least many states – would maintain abortion access.
“The Constitution is neither pro-life nor pro-choice … and leaves the issue to the people to resolve in the democratic process,” Kavanaugh said.
