The following is a transcript from the Pro America Report.
Welcome, welcome, welcome. Ed Martin here on the Pro America Report. And I have to say, the biggest story of the day everywhere should be the oral arguments that happened in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in the Mississippi pro-life case, the Dobbs case it’s called. Because if you listen to them and I didn’t listen to, let me be up front, I did not listen to the entire debate. Excuse me, the entire hearing. I listened to excerpts of it, and I did follow parts of it for a bunch of time. But then I also went and read the analysis on both sides.
And first of all, it was amazing to hear Justice Clarence Thomas for, I don’t know, two decades, he never spoke in oral arguments. He speaks now and he’s got a wonderful voice and he speaks, he’s got great questions. So he was speaking, but it’s also amazing to hear. I want to give you and again, it’s Ed Martin here on the Pro America Report, proamericareport.com.
I want to give you, this is a short opening segment, what you need to know. I want you to think about something. Very early on in the oral argument. You heard Chief Justice John Roberts refer to the fact that the framework for Roe v. Wade, in other words, the so-called trimester framework for abortion, first trimester, second trimester, third trimester, and the idea that you could not ban abortion at certain times based on the trimesters and that was the way it was divided.
He said, Chief Justice Roberts, that was made up, right? And he referred to the memos and to the internal documents of the Supreme Court that were released in the last five to ten years finally, that show that. They show that a couple of clerks working for primarily Justice Blackmun came up with, invented out of whole cloth, this notion of the trimester framework and how to limit abortion.
Now they didn’t come up completely, these memos from Justice Blackmun and others, their clerks, they didn’t come up with the entire idea of a right to privacy and that it was protected for abortion in these memos. That was a couple of cases before that, there was a sort of logical predicate for the idea of that Griswold v. Connecticut and a few others.
But what Chief Justice Roberts referred to was very clear that the justices and, more importantly, the justices’ staff had an idea that they wanted to get a result to create a right to abortion. And they worked backward from that desire to solve the problem. Now you say, okay, now we’re all these years later, that was 1973. And here we are. Yeah. But over these decades, what you have watched and heard and seen is the general solidifying of the narrative that ‘right to abortion’ has been protected by our Constitution, right? And, you know, is that there? They found this and all. And you sort of had this concretizing of something that was totally made up.
Okay, so then you get Justice Sotomayor, who jumps into one of these, part of the debate on the case, the Dobbs case, and she says fairly dramatically, are we really going to reverse decades and decades of reliance on this long-standing and historic principle regarding abortion? So you see what they’re doing. And this is very common. When it’s their issue, when it’s something that they want, meaning the left, they will rely on an argument that sounds a little bit more like a conservative argument. And that’s what Sotomayor was doing.
She was saying, look, this has been around forever. We shouldn’t mess with it. This should be something we should leave alone because it’s been around. And then she had the nerve to say, if this is changed (Roe v. Wade) in any way, any significant way, it will have the stench, a stench on it of politics because of the appointment of the three justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh and Barrett. Now this is outrageous, because for her to say the stench of politics, and then she went on to basically threaten that if this happens, we the Supreme Court will be nowhere. What are you talking about?
In the last 50 years, the Supreme Court has taken away from the American people and their representatives two or three major decisions. But the biggest one is abortion. And the second biggest one is the definition of marriage. That was done by the courts. But my point here is Chief Justice Roberts pointed to what we discovered as the facts. It was created. Roe v. Wade was made up out of whole cloth by clerks.
And then you can see Sotomayor arguing, it doesn’t matter what the facts are or the truth, she’s saying. It is simply that you can’t change that. Now the book to read on this, and I’m almost out of time, is Abuse of Discretion by Clarke Forsythe an amazing lawyer, an amazing guy. Abuse of Discretion. So check that out.
But very, very interesting day. The Dobbs case means a lot. We’ll see how it plays out, and I think it’s for those of us that have felt the scourge of abortion on our nation, a pretty positive day.
So there you have it. Go to Proamacareport.com, sign up for the Daily WYNK, and we’ll be right back. It’s Ed Martin here on the Pro America Report. Back in a moment.