When the Supreme Court of the United States ruled recently that the (in)famous federal law commonly referred to as "Roe v Wade" was actually not constitutional, and that the Federal government actually shouldn't have a say on what individual states legislate in this matter, the far left in the United States quite unsurprisingly went, once again, completely insane.
One of the most idiotic responses to the ruling was that made by Maxim Waters, a congressional representative for California. She said: "To hell with the Supreme Court. We will defy them."
What's unclear to me is how she figures that happening, exactly.
To explain what I mean, let me clarify:
Roe v Wade was a Federal law that mandated that every state must allow abortions, under certain conditions (first trimester almost all abortions are legal, no questions asked, second trimester allowed only in certain particular circumstances, third trimester allowed only in extreme circumstances). Meaning that individual states were banned from legislating on abortion (either more strictly or more leniently).
The only thing that repealing this Federal law does is that now each individual state can freely and independently legislate their own laws regarding abortion. If they want to make the conditions stricter, they can do so. If they want to make the conditions looser, they can do so.
So, in this context: What exactly does it mean for a congressional representative for one of the states (in this case California) to say that they will "defy" the Supreme Court ruling?
Defy how, exactly?
This landmark decision by the Supreme Court doesn't force states to do anything. It's the exact opposite: Forcing the states on this matter has now ended, and now they can do whatever they want.
So what exactly does "defying" this ruling mean? What exactly does Maxim Waters, the congressional representative for California, mean by "defying" the rule? Defy it how? In what manner?
Is she suggesting that if some state, let's say for example Texas, passes laws banning abortion, that California will... what? Somehow force Texas to repeal such laws? And how exactly does Maxim Waters envision this happening? Is California going to send military troops to Texas to force them to repeal the new laws?
What I suspect is happening here is that Maxim Waters, even though she's a congressional representative, doesn't actually understand what this Supreme Court ruling actually means. She should know because she's a congresswoman and knows all these rulings and laws. But I somehow suspect that she doesn't.
There's something in the far-leftist ideology that makes people into idiots. It removes many IQ points from people. It lobotomizes them and makes them stupider.
What I suspect is happening is that, like so many far-leftists in the United States, Maxim Waters believes that this Supreme Court ruling bans abortion in the entire country, and it's that ban that she's planning to "defy".
She doesn't seem to understand that it's not a ban of any sort. It's the ending of a previous federal law. California, her state, can now freely come up with their own abortion laws and make them as lenient as they want. If they want to legalize post-natal abortion, they probably can do that. There's nothing to "defy". It's not logistically possible to "defy" this Supreme Court ruling because defying it would mean that now California would somehow keep enforcing the old federal law on all states. Which would be a rather impossible thing to do. One state simply cannot mandate to other states what they can and cannot do (only the Federal government can).
And, in fact, if she thinks that the Liberal states can "defy" the Republican states, the same applies in the other direction. What stops the Republican states from "defying" the Liberal states? How exactly is Maxim Waters envisioning the Liberal states winning this "defying" contest? Via military force?
Comments
Post a Comment