Citizen Initiatives

RECLAIMING AMERICA through "Single Issue Amendment Conventions"

Home

 

 

 


 

 

 

COUNTERMAND AMENDMENT - VIDEO

 

 

 


JUDICIAL ARROGANCE - SUPREME COURT


 

 

 

 

 

 

United States Supreme Court

Roe v. Wade Decision

Justice Byron White's Dissent

 


In his dissenting opinion in Roe vs. Wade, Justice Byron White writes, “At the heart of the controversy in these cases are those recurring pregnancies that pose no danger whatsoever to the life or health of the mother but are, nevertheless, unwanted for any one of one or more of a variety or reasons—convenience, family planning, economics, dislike of children, the embarrassment of illegitimacy, etc.  The common claim before us is that, for any one of such reasons, or for no reason, at all, and without asserting or claiming any threat to life or health, any woman is entitled to an abortion at her request if she is able to find a medical advisor willing to undertake the procedure. The Court, for the most part, sustains this position: during the period prior to the time the fetus becomes viable, the Constitution of the United States values the convenience, whim, or caprice of the putative mother more than the life or potential life of the fetus; the Constitution, therefore, guarantees the right to an abortion as against any state law or policy seeking to protect the fetus from an abortion not prompted by more compelling reasons of the mother.  With all due respect, I dissent.  I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court’s judgment.  The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers [410 U.S. 222] and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes. The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 States are constitutionally dissentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on the one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the mother, on the other hand.  As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.” 

The deceased Justice White, in his dissent in Roe vs. Wade, speaks to the erroneous logic and false jurisprudence exercised by seven of the nine members of the Supreme Court in 1973. 

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Unborn Child Amendment

Unborn Child Amendment Book


 

Support the Unborn Child Amendment - make a contribution today!

Donations can also be mailed to Citizen Initiatives 962 Oak Ave., #15   Spruce Pine, NC 28777-0523*

*Donations are not tax deductible. 

 

 

Citizen Initiatives

Single Issue Amendment Conventions

962 Oak Ave., #15  Spruce Pine, NC 28777-0523

director@citizeninitiatives.org  /  http://citizeninitiatives.org

Send email to webmaster@citizeninitiatives.org with questions or comments about this web site. 
Copyright © 2021 CITIZEN INITIATIVES  (All rights reserved.)   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy