Fact Checking Justice Ginsburg

The world is still deceived with ornament.
In law, what plea so tainted and corrupt
But, being seasoned with a gracious voice,
Obscures the show of evil.
— Shakespeare

Ironically, while the jury deliberated the murder charges of abortion doctor, Kermit Gosnell in Philadelphia, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was giving a speech entitled “Roe v. Wade at 40,” at the University of Chicago Law School.  Her comments made headlines when she criticized Roe v. Wade as too sweeping a decision. Ginsburg opined that judicial restraint would have been a more appropriate approach to Roe. Fear not, feminists, Justice Ginsburg isn’t going rogue.  However, she now curiously embraces judicial restraint as a tactic to avoid shining a harsh light on judicial social change.  Justice Ginsburg posits that the Roe court over reached and became the “target” of the pro life movement.  Ah, yes, liberals don’t like target practice.

Contrary to the misleading headlines, Ginsburg is not evolving into a strict constitutional constructionist. Her argument for judicial restraintsounds more like a strategic political operative than a Supreme Court Justice. In her speech, she detailed for the audience a judicial roadmap to advance the political agenda of the left. Sounding more like a K Street lobbyist, Ginsburg advocated this judicial lofty tenet: don’t grab too much power, too fast, you might become a target of the right.

In support of her thesis, Ginsburg divined that Roe v. Wade “seemed to stop momentum on the side of change.” She argued that abortion related cases now focus on “restrictions to access, not expanding the rights of women.”

Curious, isn’t it, that Justice Ginsburg would decry the momentum shiftagainst abortion. Isn’t the mantra of the pro choice movement to make abortion safe, legal and rare? Why does Ginsburg lament a momentum shift (nuance phrase for abortion decline) if the feminists’ public goal is to make abortion rare?

Clearly, the facts do not support her premise that there was a downward “momentum shift” after Roe v. Wade.  Following the 1973 Roe decision, the CDC reported the annual number of abortions in the United States more than doubled from 615,000 in 1973 to a high of 1.4 million in 1990. The rate of abortions fluctuated throughout the intervening years. Similarly, the Guttmacher Institute, the abortion research think tank reports that abortion rates reached a high in 1990 of 1.6 million, and rates have remained relatively steady at 1.2 million a year.

Hardly rare, Justice Ginsburg.

Let the record reflect, your honor, that Roe v. Wade opened the floodgates for 40 years of nearly unfettered access to abortions in the United States.

Decades later, the American people are beginning to learn that Kermit Gosnell and many others, are the logical consequences of Roe v. Wade.As a result, states, through their elected representatives, (i.e. democratic process) are passing laws to restrict abortion because the reality of abortion is finally after 40 years, breaking down the nation’s denial.

Not surprisingly, Ginsburg blames the flawed holding in Roe on the unenlightened 7 male justices. The majority in their dull witted maleness overturned the state law outlawing abortion as violative of a privacy right between a physician and patient. Roe mistakenly held that “It’s about a doctor’s freedom to practice his profession as he thinks best,” Ginsburg said. “It wasn’t woman-centered. It was physician-centered.” As always, missing from the abortion proponents argument is the missing person, the baby.

Also missing from the Roe discussion is another important person. Justice Ginsburg didn’t mention the plaintiff, Jane Roe, a/k/a Norma McCorvey. Norma became an inconvenient and embarrassing plaintiff for the abortion movement. She ultimately rejected the abortion movement and became a powerful pro life advocate.  Few Americans realize that Norma McCorvey gave birth and did not have an abortion. Even fewer know of her pro life conversion.

The ‘momentum shifted’ because women, like Norma McCorvey realized the brutality of abortion. The ‘momentum shifted’ because of the false narrative of the abortion movement which scarred millions who bought into the nuanced lie of abortion as a reproductive right. There’s nothing reproductive about abortion. Years later, they deeply regret their abortions and are speaking up and choosing life. That’s why the ‘momentum shifted.’ Take judicial notice, Justice Ginsburg, that the momentum shifted to a women’s right to choose, to choose life. Why?

Perhaps, a new generation are missing the loss of children, siblings, aunts, uncles to abortion. Perhaps, a new generation view abortion, not as a choice, but as a loss of life. Perhaps, a new generation sees through the hypocrisy of the mantra of safe, legal and rare, as a slick tagline used to lure women to purchase abortions and kill their babies.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the rate of abortions is slowing because America is waking up to the horrors of abortions. Case in point: Dr. Kermit Gosnell.

The ‘momentum shifted’ after 40 years because Roe was not baby centered.

Ask the Gosnell jury, comprised of 7 women and 5 men. Ask them about the babies.

ArticleLara Barger