Dims Finally Found An Unlimited Right

Naturally it was not the Second Amendment.

Tim Ryan: I Don’t Support Any Limits on Abortion
Baier then followed up, “My question was about any limits to abortion at any point, late-term, anything?”

Ryan responded, “Look, you’ve got to leave it up to the woman. Because you and I sitting here…can’t account for all of the different scenarios that a woman dealing with the complexities of a pregnancy are going through. How can you and I figure that out?”

Ah, would that Rep. Ryan [Dumbass-OH] (and Senator-wannabe), held that same view of enumerated rights. Sadly, while abortions should be unlimited, it’s difficult to pin down any RKBA infringement he doesn’t like.

I suppose the difference is that the Second Amendment is enumerated; right there near the top of the Bill of Rights. Whereas abortion…

Hmm. Doesn’t seem to be there. And yet, somehow SCOTUS found it in the Fourteenth Amendment.

Let’s see if can dig up the magical, numerological algorithm the justices used to find it it in ’73.

Here we go!

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Regardless of your take on abortion, you should really find ROE v. WADE to be really bad constitutional law. I never quite (though I have strong suspicions) understood why SCOTUS mangled an amendment. meant to ensure equal protection for freed blacks, post-Civil War, to rationalize abortion rights.

After all, they could have more rationally turned to the Fourth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons

“Persons;” bodies. Eh? Or especially the Ninth Amendment…

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Now that would have been more reasonable. Cite the amendment that says there are other rights not mentioned.

Which bring me to my aforementioned “strong suspicion.” SCOTUS of the time (and currently, damnit) didn’t dare open up the statist Pandora’s Box of rights not handed down by judicial divinity; rights which we the effin’ people could invoke without waiting for their permission.

Published by


2A advocate, writer, firearms policy & law analyst, general observer of pre-apocalyptic American life.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.