By Carol Tobias, President
Editor’s note. These remarks were delivered at the opening General Session of the 2021 National Right to Life Convention.
Whenever something happens with the Supreme Court, whether it be vacancies and nominations, or something about cases themselves, advocates of abortion want everyone to believe the absolute worst outcome is going to happen.They create hysteria in order to raise funds and motivate some volunteers. So, now, the Supreme Court has announced it would hear Dobbs v Jackson out of Mississippi.
US Senator Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada penned an op-ed in which she wrote, “Last month, the Supreme Court announced that it will take up Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, the most significant challenge to Roe v. Wade in nearly five decades—and the most direct threat to abortion since the decision itself.
She continued. “To protect access to abortion, we must first acknowledge that Roe is the floor, not the ceiling… Congress must pass the Women’s Health Protection Act, a bill I have championed since I was elected to the Senate, to establish a statutory right to access abortion.”
Did you hear that? Roe is the floor, not the ceiling. They want to build on Roe. All the laws that you have worked so hard to pass would not be allowed under this bill.
Alexis McGill Johnson, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America said of Dobbs, “This is absolutely a direct challenge to Roe.”
Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said, “Alarm bells are ringing loudly about the threat to reproductive rights,The Supreme Court just agreed to review an abortion ban that unquestionably violates nearly 50 years of Supreme Court precedent and is a test case to overturn Roe v. Wade.”
An article in the Orlando Weekly was headlined, “The Supreme Court is about to seize its chance to kill Roe v. Wade.”
This is not new. An article by Mary Ziegler, a known abortion proponent, wrote, about the 1992 Supreme Court decision in Planned Parenthood v Casey, “Believing that the Court would reverse Roe, larger abortion-rights groups like NARAL played up rights-based claims.”
In 2005, regarding the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court, Nancy Keenan, then-president of NARAL wrote, “We are extremely disappointed that President Bush has chosen such a divisive nominee for the highest court in the nation, rather than a consensus nominee who would protect individual liberty and uphold Roe v. Wade.”
In 2018, Keenan’s successor at NARAL, Ilyse Hogue said, “Today, Justice Kennedy announced his retirement, and because President Trump will nominate the next supreme court justice, a woman’s constitutional right to access legal abortion is in dire, immediate danger.”
In 2019, the Supreme Court decided not to hear an abortion case from Alabama. CNN noted that Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with that decision but (quote) “He described the high court’s abortion jurisprudence as having “spiraled out of control” and urged the justices to take up the issue soon.”
NARAL tweeted the CNN article with the comment, “While SCOTUS thankfully declined to hear a case on abortion from Alabama this week, Justice Clarence Thomas made one thing crystal clear: Roe v. Wade is in immediate danger.”
We certainly hope these predictions come true; we just don’t know when that will be.
Recently, when talking about the Dobbs case, a reporter asked if the Court upholding the law would be a victory. I said certainly, it would be but,if upheld, this law would protect about 10% of preborn children. She asked, “And you want to stop all abortions, right?”
I explained, of course we want to protect all unborn children, but we have– for many years– worked to save as many lives as we can as soon as we can, while working to protect them all.
That’s our goal here. We don’t know what the Court will do, but if they give us the ability to save some children, we will gladly do that while continuing our efforts to protect the rest.