It was not a unanimous vote by the Supreme Court. Seven of nine judges determined their superiority over states' rights.<quoted text>Viable is part of the wording of Roe V Wade. In other words, the killing of a VIABLE fetus is a crime--murder. However, not allowing abortions after six weeks, or twelve weeks, or even twenty weeks is unconstitutional, which is why ten/twelve states currently have retraining orders against their legislature's (republican) laws that have decided that if they can't overturn Roe V Wade they'll just be as ignorant and childish as they are wont to be and pretend it doesn't exist. Those same legislators that subsidize corporations and corporate farms but are outraged if a hungry family gets $136 a month in SNAP benefits, are downright righteous about spending millions to fight an obviously losing position in court.
As to Virginia, the proposed law, which led to Bob McDonald being called Governor Vaginal Probe, was omitted from the final bill because Bob became embarrassed by a few other scandals in his wheelhouse. The current republican candidate wants to bring it back as well as deny all abortions in the state. Wisconsin? Well, they learned from Virginia's mistakes. " In order to achieve most of that with the “quality consistent with current medical practice”, a transvaginal ultrasound must be used. Oh, but they didn’t SAY vaginal probe. Republicans learned after the Virginia debacle. They found a new way to mandate vaginal ultrasounds without saying it."
I'm sorry you're so stupid, Batty, but it's your own fault and none of my own.
Justices Byron White and William Rehnquist wrote emphatic dissenting opinions in this case.
"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 women and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes...In my view, the court's judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court."
...Justice White was absolutely correct. The court's decision was an "improvident and extravagant exercise by judicial review".
Seven people took it upon themselves to determine a federal law that involves matters of life and death without any regard to many people's personal beliefs and usurping state's rights and the will of the people.
A law that goes against half the country's beliefs should not be decided by seven people - or even nine people.
What if the majority of judges were extremely conservative and interpreted the Constitution that leaned towards the traditional values of the right?
I'm quite sure you'd be empathetic to how some of us feel about Roe v Wade if the shoe were on the other foot.
Fortunately for you, the shoe was on the left. This time.