Life Wins: Roe v. Wade Overturned After 50 Years
24 Jun 2022
BUCK: A huge, huge day in the news with Roe v. Wade done. It took 50 years, give or take, but here we are. We’ll get into all of this. I’m solo today. Clay is tending to family matters. He may be joining us via phone at some point during the show. Depends on his obligations today. But this is Buck Sexton. I’m down in Florida currently, and I was watching live this morning as the massive, massive Supreme Court decision came down, arguably the biggest Supreme Court decision in my lifetime — certainly in the top two or three, I would think.
Massive decision, 6-3 here, a 200-page opinion released by the court this morning. So, I was reading it feverishly to get through as much as humanly possible before coming on air. So, there’s a couple of ways to look at this. And we’re gonna break down the legal aspect of it, the political implications, the possibility for civil unrest from Democrats, of course. As we know, they are — despite at one time they are fixated on a riot coming from their political opponents, the Democrats are — the riot as normal political discourse party. That could happen.
We’ll certainly look at that. What does this mean for the midterm elections as well? Can Democrats capitalize on this decision as a means of mobilizing the Democrat base? There’s so much going on here, there’s so much to look at, but I would start with the very simple proposition here that life wins in this case. The Supreme Court decision has not made abortion illegal nationally, but it will result in — and I believe the state of Missouri has already, because it had some laws ready to go in case of this decision. It has effectively outlawed almost all abortions.
But it does mean that there will be far more babies born. There will be far more children who grow up to be adults, people who have lives that they’re able to lead, and parents who will have made the right decision and will know that in time — even if they were scared at first, even if it was unplanned, even if it was a surprise or an inconvenient time or any of those things. So there will be now millions, millions of lives over the decades to come that will occur. It’s not even…
To say that the lives are saved is true, but there also will be people who get to enjoy their full lives, get to enjoy the experience of life and parents who will enjoy the experience of their children, of being parents, as a result of this decision. Now, there will still be abortion in New York and California — and Colorado just recently passed a radical state level abortion law. Abortion, all nine months of a pregnancy. But in this 6-3 decision, the critical change here is that both Roe and Casey were overruled. Both Roe and Casey were found to be bad law, Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Now, there’s a lot of intricate legal analysis when you read this opinion authored by Alito in the majority. When you read this opinion, you find yourself saying, it’s stunning, honestly, at this point in time. It is stunning to look back and see how flimsy and dishonest and obtuse and just… The whole Roe regime was built on lies. The legal analysis was preposterous. It can’t even begin to hold up to rational scrutiny. It can’t even begin to be looked at as a good-faith argument. And you can start with this proposition.
🚨 Supreme Court of United States overturns ‘Roe v. Wade’
Alito: There is nothing in the Constitution about abortion…@lilagracerose: Children will live because of this decision to overturn the constitutional fiction of Roe v. Wade…
— Live Action News (@LiveActionNews) June 24, 2022
The right to an abortion, according to Roe, came from a “right to privacy,” neither of which are actually mentioned in the Constitution, neither of which actually exist. And then the right to abortion that comes from a right to privacy was somehow tied to a bunch of different amendments. They weren’t somehow how many different amendments. They threw a bunch of numbers in there. And then later on it was, “Well, it’s actually a liberty right that comes from a due process right.” This was a complete…
This was not only, of course, violence to all the millions of preborn children who suffered as a result of this Roe regime. This was violence to the law. This was lunacy. It was astonishingly dishonest for the legal regime in this country to have upheld this as long as it did. It was astonishingly obtuse for Democrats to walk around with this certainty, this slogan, “a constitutional right to an abortion.” At the time of Roe, the costs of states outlawed abortion perform there was a long history of abortion as illegal, and abortion was certainly not even a procedure that one could engage in at the time of the founding.
So this was completely contrary to the rights — and this is all laid out in the opinion — that you would find as a result of driving into our history, looking at the history and what the implied and foundational routes are as a result of that history. So he this was always bad law. We knew it. I said it. And I’ve been thinking, stretching back to last fall, that they would be willing to do this. It is a massive step in the right direction for the rule of law and also for decency and morality in this country, on so many levels.
To demand that people not only accept that babies were being killed as a function of not only this massive abortion industry in so many of these Planned Parenthood and other facilities across the country — and we know that’s what was going on. We know just based on the language they always use. “Oh, it’s about freedom of a woman to control her destiny.” No, it’s, “Can you kill babies in the womb?” That’s actually the question. They can talk about all these other things. But the fundamental question was the protection of the life in the womb.
And now the states can look at and determine, “Well, when does that life begin?” And this is something that on the state-by-state basis there will be different responses. But to make everyone in this country go through with this… It was almost a Soviet-level pretense: “Yes, there’s a constitutional right to an abortion.” No one really thought that. It’s not in the Constitution. It’s not in our legal and constitutional history. The basis for this was a fabrication.
And so in that sense, they were forcing us all to be complicit in a lie. And what do I always say? To borrow from the great Solzhenitsyn, speaking of anti-Soviets, “Live not by lies.” Roe forced us all as a nation to live by lies for decades. And now these different states that have these policies are gonna have to justify what they’re doing. They no longer have this catch-all. They no longer have this facade of “It’s a constitutional right. Shut up! Decided. It’s over.” Not anymore. Now what’s the argument?
Now who is going to want to be that state legislator that stands up in Colorado and says, “A baby at nine months in the womb is not a baby. Do anything you want to it. It’s fine. It’s legal.” Who wants to make that barbarous argument now? I know there are a lot of very ardently pro-abortion legislators out there — Nancy Pelosi and others among them — who have been saying such things. But what you’re going to see is now it becomes much more difficult.
Now they have to actually engage with the substance. They have to engage with the merits of the argument. What is it, then, at nine months, if it’s not a baby? At eight months, at seven months, at six months? What is that little heartbeat? What are those tiny fingernails and eyes and the nose and the adorable little toes? What is all of that if it’s not a baby? Democrats are acting out with rage in a frenzy right now because for the first time in any of their — in, well, basically the first time in memory.
Some people may remember a pre-Roe era, but very few these days, comparatively. And for the first time, they’re going to have to make the case that convenience overrides a right to life and that the state — which has a fundamental, foundational responsibility to protect innocent life — should turn the other way as people continue to make this decision. This is often just so barbarous, it’s so clearly morally wrong. And yet here we are, after how many decades of this, after how many decades of having to pretend that this made sense.
To pretend that it was constitutional, to pretend that there was some ethical understanding that we had all reached as a country. No, we had not. I want to say — I’d be remiss if I did not say it — a huge amount of gratitude should be given to those who have been working patiently, tirelessly in the pro-life movement; for those who have been convincing people, who have been providing assistance to mothers who are having a crisis pregnancy, who are having a difficult time with this in their lives; for those who worked in legal circles, the legislature and the Federalist Society.
There has been an army of righteousness that for decades have been fighting to get to this point. Now, it’s not over. The army cannot disband, so to speak. Remember, an army of righteousness means one that is lawful and kind and loving and supportive of all lives, and supportive of lives of the unborn, helping everyone who is having a difficult time with their pregnancy, helping their fellow Americans understand why this is such an important issue, and now taking it to the legislature. But the fight continues on, because now we’ll see what states decide.
There will be some states that protect life. There will be other states that decide they want to go as far as possible — and this is going to be a political issue. Now I think you’re going to see a bit of hysteria from the Democrats about, “They want to ban contraception, they want to ban condoms, they want to ban…” No. That’s not what’s going on right now. But they are very upset, and I would just leave you with this thought before we get into some of the politics of this in a moment.
And I mean, you know, the electoral who’s in power, who’s calling the shots components here. There are a lot of people for whom today — and it will take time for this to sink in — either through their own personal actions or their support of the abortion regime for decades will slowly come around to realizing that the constitutional justification for this was always. And then that leaves you only with your own conscience and your own morality. And it’s gonna be a whole lot harder for people.
It’s gonna be very difficult on a lot of people in this country right now, I think, who have the ability to think critically and engage in some level of introspection over this. It’s gonna be painful when this finally seeps in, that this was not some constitutional right all along and that something else, something very different was at work here. So, it is a day that, as I’ve said, you can summarize it as, “Life wins, but the battle is not over.” It is a great day for the legacy of the Trump administration. There’s no question about it. It’s a great day for the Supreme Court.
They did not buckle to the obvious pressure campaign from the left to continue with this regime of infanticide. And it’s a good day for the country because the rule of law is starting to, at least for a moment here, feel like it means something again — and it’s not just the whim of dictatorial, activist judges. It’s not the demands of the mob out on the street or in front of the judges’ homes. It’s what is actually true, what is the law, what is right, and what is good. So those are all things that come together today.
DON JR.: It’s not meant as a call just to Donald Trump. It’s meant as a call to anyone who would question, you know, the authority of so many of these unelected officials.
CLAY: Forcing people who were dying in the hospital to not be able to speak with their family members is, to me, a crime against humanity.
BUCK: The CDC failed in a way that it should be torn down to the studs, all of its leadership should be fired, it should be renamed something else.
CLAY: Wasn't it only, like, six weeks ago that Trump had supposedly grabbed the steering wheel?
BUCK: I say we take the people seriously who have been right all along instead of the people who have been wrong like Ashish Jha.