Does SCOTUS Leak on Roe v. Wade Really Help The Dems?
As MIRS newsletter reported last week, whoever leaked the U.S. Supreme Court’s draft on overturning Roe v Wade put Republicans in a bind — at least it initially seems so. In the week since the revelation, the Democrats have seemingly been everywhere — defining the prospective decision as destroying a constitutional right. There’s little doubt which side of the abortion debate is most energized, at least as of this moment. From the viewpoint of Democrats, news that Roe v Wade may be threatened tumbled to Earth like manna from heaven. National polling was showing President Joe BIDEN’s popularity lost in a deep valley and Democrats in general not doing much better. But now, with Roe v Wade endangered, there’s hope that the expected ‘Red Wave’ won’t materialize. So here are the questions:
Question 1): Republicans complain about the news leak about the U.S. Supreme Court leaning toward overturning Roe v Wade and sending the abortion issue back to the state level. We don’t know for sure that is how the high bench will rule. However, wouldn’t it have been better for Democrats if this ‘bombshell’ leak had been delayed until June or July — roughly two months closer to the election?
Answer 1): No, this gives Democrats maximum time to raise money off it, and to hone their “message” as to how they’re going to campaign with it. Besides, it jump starts their petition drive here in Michigan to get the abortion question on the Nov. 8 general election ballot. They’ll need something like 600,000 signatures (to be safe) by July 11. A June or July “leak” wouldn’t have helped them much.
*******************************************************
Question 2): Is it likely or unlikely that the Michigan Supreme Court, in response to Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s demand, will strike down Michigan’s 1931 law against abortions?
Answer 2): Likely, with the Michigan high bench controlled by the Democrats, and a four-woman majority. That won’t be the end of it, though.
*****************************************************
Question 3): If the abortion rights petition drive qualifies for the ballot this coming November and is approved by the voters, would it be a good bet that some sort of proposal outlawing late-term abortions (beyond the first trimester, etc.) will be on the 2024 or 2026 ballot?
Answer 3): Yes. Each side — both pro-choice and pro-life — is in danger of overreaching on this explosive issue. If Michigan winds up with a no-holds-barred “abortion on demand” statute in place at the end of this year, there will be a huge push-back by the pro-life forces, and pro-choice supporters will be hard-pressed to defend such an extreme law, which polls show the general public does not support any more than it supports a no-exception total ban.
**********************************************************
Question 4): Attorney General Dana NESSEL has pledged that, if Roe v Wade is overturned, she’ll refuse to prosecute anyone for violating the 1931 anti-abortion law. Would it be smart or foolish for her likely opponent, Republican Matt DePERNO, to try to use that against her in the general election?
Answer 4): The proper question would be — use it against Nessel in what way? If DePerno can control himself, he might have a good case to make that it’s inappropriate for an Attorney General to make such a pronouncement when so much about the issue is unsettled. And Nessel knows that her grand-standing on the issue won’t prevent individual county prosecutors from filing charges on an aborted pregnancy. So DePerno could point out that it would be far more “statesmanlike” for Nessel to just keep her mouth shut for the time being. But it’s doubtful DePerno will do that. He’s likely to go “full Monte” in the other direction and promise that, as Attorney General, he would prosecute any and every abortion he could find. That would be a mistake, but that’s what he’s known for.
***********************************************************
So enjoy reading TBR on Monday morning. On point.
Even Alicia Smith, WXYZ-ABC 18 year News anchor said, “This will drive women to the polls”
Politically, Dems will ride the emotion of this issue to win in 5 !/2 months.
Onward and forward.
Best always, John
If the ballot proposal is approved, there would have have to be a ballot proposal reversing it before a legislature could enact a statute prohibiting abortion before or after viability. The is because the proposal states an individual’s right to reproductive freedom shall not be denied, infringed or burdened except by a compelling state interest and then says a state interest is compelling only if it is for the limited purpose of protecting the health of an individual seeking care. Protecting the life of an unborn child can not, therefore, be a compelling state interest under the ballot proposal.
Abortion on demand at any time prior to birth seems to have limited public support so it is possible that abortion rights supporters may have overreached in attempting to write their most-favored outcome into the Michigan Constitution.
There are a lot more pro-life democrats than I think people realise. Millenials are considered the most pro-life generation. (Probably becasue 1/3 of our generation was murdered in the womb) I don’t think the pro-deathers are going to prevail here.
Profoundly monstrous evil is abortion. It’s so evil, the misled think it’s good. When evil is good, we have a problem of moral rot.