Well, folks. We are going to find out in due course — possibly soon — just how consequential presidential elections always have been.
The issue at hand is abortion and whether the Texas strict anti-abortion law will withstand judicial review. I happen to believe the law is unconstitutional, that it runs counter to what we long have thought was “settled law.” That the Roe v. Wade decision handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973 had been settled, that women had a constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy.
Oh, but wait. The issue is likely to end up in front of the SCOTUS again. Here is where the election issue comes in.
The 45th POTUS nominated three justices on the court. He was able to cement the conservative majority. The court is now lined up with six conservatives and three liberals. The conservatives, with — with Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch on board — well might decide that the Texas law is OK after all.
A federal judge in Texas, Robert Pittman — appointed by President Barack Obama — has declared the Texas law to be unconstitutional. It’s headed already to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which well could reverse Judge Pittman’s 100-page ruling. You can count on the Justice Department to take this matter up on the judicial ladder.
Hmm. Do you think Pittman’s ruling will hold up? Neither do I.
We need to ponder this when the time comes to ponder the next presidential election.
