Grey Thoughts
U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Partial Birth Abortion Ban
Verum Serum has a roundup of reactions to the U.S. Supreme court upholding a ban on partial birth abortion's.

Instapundit's response is somewhat confusing
I believe that the ban should have been struck down on commerce clause grounds as outside Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce.
Instapundit, professor of Law Glenn Reynolds, is as far as I can tell pro-abortion. Does he also favor the striking down of Roe Vs Wade on the same grounds? Surely the Roe vs Wade case is outside Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce as much as a partial birth abortion ban would?

I think Glenn must be either for striking down Roe vs Wade or he is just using a double standard of supporting legal decisions that agree with his own preferences and complaining about legal decisions that disagree.

Striking down Roe vs Wade would probably leave at least half of the states as abortion free zones as they still have laws on the books preventing it.
The commerce clause is a copout. Liberals become strict constructionists when it suits their ideology. The commerce clause is one of the most abused clauses in the constitution (after the establishment clause).

I haven't read the federal statute so I don't know exactly what it outlaws and how it does it. But in general, the federal govt should not have the authority to regulate a local clinic that does not have interstate commerce.

Having said that, I was shocked (in a good way) to hear of the ruling. Roe should be overturned and return the debate back to the states.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger Weblog Commenting and Trackback by