I’ll admit that I’m certainly not one, but I was intrigued by what the WBAP talk-show host wrote in an op-ed piece yesterday regarding the validity of Roe v. Wade.
Long story short, Davis repeats the well-known argument–first articulated, in fact, by William Rehnquist, one of two dissenting justices in the case–that the Constitution says nothing about protecting a woman’s right to have an abortion. Davis writes:
And there is not one word of the Constitution that bestows a blanket federal right to terminate a life in the womb. Judge Roberts was right in 1990 when he said Roe vs. Wade was improperly decided.
As such, it should be overturned, not because he or anyone wants less abortion in America, but because the Supreme Court should not make stuff up, and when it does, it should be corrected.
But if that’s the case, doesn’t it mean that Marbury v. Madison falls under the same category, that the court was just making stuff up? Judicial review is not in the Constitution. Or what about Brown v. Board of Education? That took power away from the states, though I don’t see anything in the Constitution about integrated schools.
I think the larger point is that the courts can rule on evolving issues that the Framers couldn’t have considered using the spirit of the Constitution as a guide.