The abortion ruling of the US Supreme Court triggered panic: hopeless fighting and the opening of the darkness

Since the decision was released, at least 14 states

The prohibition of abortion bill has been triggered

Some states give the Ministry of Justice of the State

The power to mention criminal proceedings for women who implement abortion

On June 24, 2022, the "Tragedy Day" in the US President Biden's mouth. The US Supreme Court made a decision on a case of abortion rights in Mississippi. Conservative judges voted at a 6: 3 advantage to allow the state to ban women from abortion after more than 15 weeks after pregnancy, and overthrowing the "ROE V. Wade" judgment made by the Supreme Court in 1974 to determine abortion The rights of citizenship contained in the United States Constitution are not allowed to prohibit abortions by legislation.

The United States is the country of jurisprudence. The ruling of the Supreme Court rarely overturns its precedent. It is rare for the judgment of depriving the rights of the individual by overthrowing the precedent. The case has shocked the United States and the world.

The judgment of the Supreme Court aroused the wave of protests in the United States. Figure/Network Video Screenshot 频

Biden issued a statement saying that it was a "wrong decision." International institutions such as the United Nations, the World Health Organization and other foreign politicians such as Canada Trudeau all spoke as soon as possible, expressing regret and concerns. In California, the Democratic Camp, which has supported abortion rights, the Minister of Justice Bangta claimed that "the court's decision is shameless, unprecedented, and dangerous, and it will bring the United States back to the dark era."

What worries the legal community is that the new judgment of the Supreme Court may only mean the beginning of the "Dark Age". Over the past three decades, a precedent for citizenship by liberal judges has the risk of re -examination and overthrowing, and eventually touches everyone.

A bad judgment?

Most of the opinions written by the conservative judge Alito reached 213 pages, and there was no substantial difference between the draft exposed in May this year in May this year. Research.

In December 1969, the 21 -year -old girl Noma McCowei, a 21 -year -old girl in Texas, was pregnant for the third time. She repeatedly violently hoped to have an abortion, but in the past century, there have been no abortion in the United States. With the support of the two young lawyers, McCawa sued the District Court of Texas with a statutory pseudonym "Roy". The case appealed to the Supreme Court. The judges were judged 7: 2 in 1973. The abortion of women within a certain period of pregnancy is the privacy of the 14th amendment to the Constitution, and is not interfered and obstructed by external factors. Since then, the states of the United States have gradually relaxed the abortion ban and restrictions.

Since the 1980s, with the rise of the "New South direction" movement of the Republican Party for conservative voters, abortion rights are bound to the United States politics polarization, and they have become the focus of the Republican-Conservative and Democratic Party-Liberty -ated and differentiated voters. "Roy Case" has also become more and more conservative judges after working. However, in the previous relevant judgments, no matter whether the court is a conservative or liberal number, most judges still support the precedent. In 1992, the Supreme Court comprehensively reviewed the Roy case in the Kaisi case as a precedent. It was determined that it should continue to follow. This verdict was regarded by liberal legal persons as conclusions.

Conservative judges who voted to overthrow the precedent in this verdict were also asked by members of the Roy case when they were nominated after receiving nominations. Most of them recognize that this is an important case that has been repeatedly demonstrated by the seniors, but it has not promised not to re -examine this first example. Among them, Judge Barrett pointed out many times that the Roy case is not a "super jurisprudence" for the public without controversy.

The latest data from the Gallop poll in May 2022 shows that 35%of the American people believe that abortion should be legal in any case. 18%of the people believe that abortion is legal in most cases. In the case, 13%of the people believed that abortion was completely illegal. Different reality has become the starting point for the precedent of the judgment to overthrow.

However, the legal argument that the judgment was launched is controversial. The author Judge Alito applied to the theory of "Constitutional Templimalism", claiming that "the constitution did not mention abortion, and any constitutional terms had no hidden right to protect this right." In this regard, Joseph Brass, a researcher at Northwestern University Law School, pointed out that the ninth amendment of the Constitution has long pointed out that the list of rights of the Constitution is "not detailed", and the right to concluding the right of innocence in criminal justice is not among them. According to the spirit of the Constitution, the spirit of the Constitution Extending this list is the responsibility of the court.

In fact, the US legal community has formed a variety of recognized abortion rights demonstrations in the past half century: the court's judgment since the Roy Case has put it in multiple constitutional amendments but not listed but not enrolled. Under the "personal privacy rights", some constitutionalists have compared the "non -voluntary slavery" of the 13th amendment to "forcing women to continue to get pregnant with their wishes to continue their pregnancy, thereby demonstrating that abortion is prohibited from unconstitutional.

In the demonstration of the specific problems of abortion, Alto retreated further, causing the public to question the "class gap" of judges and civilians. The Kaisi case pointed out that the ability of women to participate in economic and social life is "benefited from controlling their own fertility", but this judgment is simply denied that "it is difficult for anyone to evaluate the impact of abortion rights on women's lives". The youngest judge Barrett's performance in court was even more ridiculed by "why not eat meat". She asked the lawyer: "Motherhood burden" brought to women by pregnancy and raising, "Should not be resolved by the" Safety Port Law "(allowing parents to transfer infants to the public welfare institution as a" safe port 'within 3 days after the baby was born)? "The famous constitutionalist and Professor Andrew Copeman, a professor at Northwestern University Law School, bluntly said that the question was" very stupid ", but still gave a detailed answer: the harm caused by pregnancy to the body is irreversible, and the birth and abandoning baby will give it even more. Women bring psychological permanent trauma. In addition, if the abortion is banned, the fostering system as a "safe port" will be "unable to breathe" by more than 800,000 babies every year ...

Although the controversy was heavy, the judgment still concluded that the Roy case judgment was "big mistakes" from the beginning and "generated destructive consequences." The judgment will be guilty of the contradictions between the abortion rights caused by the dispute between the two parties. Based on the discourse of the constitutionalism of the Constitution, it was decided that "it is time to obey the constitution and return the abortion problem to the candidate representative." In other words, the verdict is not forbidden to abandon, but that the constitution does not protect abortion rights, so that the power to decide and restrict the abortion may be returned to each state.

This rough judgment has not been recognized by all conservative judges. Judge Cavano held a positive attitude towards the Constitution in individual opinions. The individual opinion of the chief judge Roberts showed that he had tried to reconcile the conservative judge's position, thinking that the court could choose to maintain the abortion law of only Mississippi, and left it to completely deny whether the abortion right in the constitution was reserved to the future. Can succeed.

After the verdict was released, Missouri became the first state to announce the triggering abortion ban. As of 8 am on June 25th, Beijing time, Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utaim, Huaandan, etc. At least 14 states have been triggered, and most of them belong to the Republican camp. In some states, the relevant bills not only stipulate the prohibition of abortion, but also give the Ministry of Justice the Ministry of Justice of the State of the Ministry of Justice who implement criminal proceedings who implement the abortion and help.

The judgment of the Supreme Court aroused the wave of protests in the United States. Figure/Network Video Screenshot

Is there an hopeless struggle?

No surprise, the judgment of the Supreme Court stirred up the wave of protests in the United States. Since the "Capitol Riorm" a year and a half ago, police officers holding explosion shields were once again on the streets of Washington on June 24th to face loud protests. The reporter at the scene saw that many members of the National Congress looked or angry, and some parliamentarians walked into the demonstrators regardless of security. People's spearheads point to the Supreme Court, while also pointing to the Bayeng administration and the Democratic Party: Since the judgment has leaked drafts in May, why did the Liberal School fail to stop this result?

Lievinson, a well -known constitutionalist and Professor of the School of Law of the University of Texas University, pointed out "China News Weekly" that the judgment has been a foregone conclusion since 2020. At that time, the US President Trump had nominated two anti -abortion conservative judges. In the similar judgment of that year, it was only one vote to overthrow the Roy case.

On September 18, 2020, Liberal Judge Kingsberg died suddenly, causing Trump to suddenly increase the opportunity to nominate the Supreme Court judge on the eve of the November election. Barrett, then the judge of the Court of Appeals, became a candidate. She was a "qualitative" judge from a constant professor, and the legal community could not come up with decent opposition. But she is also a typical conservative judge and a firm anti -abortion person. A legal profession who is familiar with her revealed to China News Weekly that Barrett has seven children: five biological, two adopted from Haiti. One of her biological sons suffered from Tang's syndrome, but she decided to give birth to her child.

Lenneson pointed out that in the past five years, the two parties have frequently changed the rules of the Senate's discussion and transformed the "two -thirds" ticket required by the Supreme Court Judge's nominee to one -half of the "simple majority pass". This has led to both sides no longer looking for the highest fame and neutral and gentle judges, but instead prefer the "qualified" candidate who can clearly clarify the "standing team". The legal argumentation of this verdict was rough, which once again reflected that the new judges were unable to learn from their predecessors. In 2020, Judge Cavano listed the history of the Supreme Court's overthrow of the Supreme Court during the verbal debate of the case, and even the conservative camp also criticized him to "ignore the precedent of the same type as the case in this case." As for Barrett, before he was nominated as a federal judge, she was a constitutional scholar, but was by no means a constitutionalist. Lenneson, who had been cited many times in the paper, said that she had never noticed any views of her at the time.

After failing to stop Barrett as a judge, the Democratic Party and Liberals had no hope of preceding the Roy case through the court voting. In early May 2022, the draft of the Supreme Court's verdict suddenly leaked, causing rare leaks in the history of American judicial history. Conservatives and free camps have accused each other's culprit in charge of the other party. It is worth noting that the Senate Democrats took this opportunity to seek a precedent for the Roy Case into the grammatical law through legislation. However, even if the Republican senators are still under pressure from the outside world, the Republican Senators are still united, so that the Senate's only one of the advantages of Democrats cannot obtain the 60 -vote threshold required to be included in the codes. Biden's last attempt was announced. Since then, the White House has held many meetings every week to discuss the response after the release of the judgment. Due to the unable to go through the legislative approach of Congress, the Bayeng government proposed to confront the judgment to "landing" through the presidential administrative order, including the announcement of public health emergency state. However, some staff pointed out that these administrative measures will soon be judged by courts at all levels. Instead, they will be used by Republicans to criticize the Biden government's "administrative expansion". Until today, the judgment has been released, how the government responds, and there is no conclusion in the White House. Larry Gosten, a professor of public health law at the White House with suggestions for the White House, hinted that Biden "may make his supporters disappointed."

On the other hand, the Democratic election team responded rapidly. On June 24th, the Democratic Campus Campaign launched a national volume organization to "ensure that Americans have a tool for turning anger into action". The US media disclosed that the Democratic Party is focusing on the most critical "swing state" of volunteers in the midterm elections. In addition to the "Red State" that has triggered an abortion ban, most of the "Swing State" abortion policy adjustment is still "swinging". Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Virginia and Wisconsin will become the focus of the two parties in the first -class abortion legislation in the state.

However, it is difficult to judge whether the wave of national protests caused by this judgment to be transformed into a Democratic Party. Earlier, the analysis predicted that in the mid -term elections in November, the Democratic Party will lose at least a majority of the Senate and the House of Representatives. The latest polls show that although 55%of Democratic voters said the abortion right has increased their voting motivation, the overall American voters have not mobilized voting enthusiasm for this case. More than 60 % of voters said that the current spread of inflation in the United States is a question they care about.

The opinions issued by Liberal judges such as Breye pointed out that this time, the Democratic Party and Liberal voters have no retreat: "The most threatening" in this judgment is "no content to prevent the federal government from prohibiting abortion across the country." In other words, if the Republican government came to power again, "the problems facing American women are no longer going to New York or California to abandon, but to abandon Toronto."

The judgment of the Supreme Court aroused the wave of protests in the United States. Figure/Network Video Screenshot

Is a pillar fall?

What impact will it have on American society? Some research predicts that in the first year after the overthrow of the Roy case, there will be about 100,000 American women who want to have abortion and cannot be. Another study shows that the mortality rate of maternal mothers will increase at least 20%as a result. However, the legal community is even more worried that the Roy case is just the beginning of the "conservative court" to overthrow the precedent of citizen's rights.

Liberal judges Breye, Sodomar, and Cagan pointed out in the objections released on June 24th that "no one believes that most of them will feel that the case has completed their work." As a "echo", a conservative judge Thomas listed a series of precedents related to the legal rights of the married couple and the legal related to the same -sex marriage in the personal opinion released on the same day. Error established in the precedent ".

Professor Aziz Hook of the University of Chicago's School of Law pointed out that the next goal of conservative judges will be combined with the Republican "political priority", focusing on reviewing the rights of gun control, sexual minority group rights, ethnic hatred crimes, enrollment equal rights rights Act of bill, "Obama Medical Reform" and other topics.

The common features of these precedents and the Roy case are that they all involve citizenships that are contained in the constitution but have not been clearly listed, and these rights are related to "the decision to do their own body and life". At present, multiple cases related to the above issues have entered the court process. Considering that the Supreme Court has the power to choose a case, when the remaining precedent is only a matter of time.

After the judgment of this case was made public, the polls showed that 66% of the American people in favor of the increase in the term of office of the Supreme Court judge, and 45% of them in favor of expanding the number of judges from 9 to 11 or more. The setting of the Supreme Court judge needs to formulate a amendment to the Constitution, and there is no possibility of implementation in the short term. Experts point out that this actually shows that the US court system has been seriously questioned by the public.

As a result, Levinson was worried that if the above -mentioned series of precedents were overturned, in the future, "the people who hold a liberalist position are no longer willing to seek help from the Supreme Court", which means that at least half of the U.S. citizens will lose their "three power to the United States. "The most stable pillar" in the separation -the confidence of the judicial system. The academic community is even more worried that the aggressive sound in the Democratic Party and Liberals will set off a wave of "new populist" against the Supreme Court, causing further division of society.

"One day, the court will no longer be regarded by the people as legal, which is not impossible. Its ruling will be ignored. After all, it does not have its own law enforcement agency or army." Said Kimber Veler, a professor at the University of Law School of Baltham. How to stop these tragedies? Josh Blackman, a professor of constitutional studies in South Germany, pointed out that the only hope is whether the three liberal judges can compromise with conservative judges. The judgment of this case shows that the chief judge Roberts and the conservative judge Cavano have both become "mild". Blackman believes that if freelance judges can "sacrifice" a part of liberalist positions, unite the two conservative judges to form a "middle majority" of 5: 4, and there is hopes to maintain some precedents.

There are also voices that this case is just an example, and the "legal professional community" in the United States has not yet been "degenerate." Since the US presidential election in 2020, Trump has popularized his allies to file a total of 62 challenge elections, but it has been rejected by 86 state courts and federal court judges. More than half of these judges are candidates nominated by Trump and Republican Party Essence Daniel Tocci, dean of the University of Wisconsin University, pointed out that judges are still the "last line of defense" of American democracy.

Reporter: [email protected])

Edit: Xu Fangqing

- END -