If Roe v. Wade were reversed...

[misanthrope]

...there's one impact I don't see discussed.

Roe v. Wade is based upon a SCOTUS interpretation of the Constitution in which a right to privacy, while not explicitly stated, is implied. If that decision were to be reversed and that precedent of the implied right gone, what would that mean for a nation in a post-Patriot Act world?

[Taverner]

1. Well - this would get interesting

Does John McCain kick it and Stalin Palin is POTUS?

President Sarah Palin?

Her presidency is a game-changing event.

She might ban all abortions nationwide by Executive Order.

It can happen.

She would do it.

[yardwork]

8. I don't think that the president could ban all abortions.

Unless she declared some kind of state of emergency with a complete suspension of constitutional rights. It's more likely that she would be able to appoint a couple of Supreme Court justices, and then the fundies would bring a challenge to Roe v Wade and it would be overturned. That would negate the impact of the decision, which was to make it unconstitutional for states to deny abortion rights. It would kick the question of abortion back to the states, and the fundies would begin working on the state level to outlaw abortion rights, as well as the right to contraception. They'd also have a springboard for laws allowing people to deny care on the basis of religious freedom, which would mean that women, gay people, and minorities would be denied care.

More interestingly, as the OP is getting at, would be the impact on the interpretation of personal rights in the Constitution. Without a right to privacy - the basis for Roe v Wade - would the courts allow the federal and state legislatures to enact even more draconian legislation denying people's fundamental rights? This could go way beyond abortion.

[misanthrope]

11. Bingo**nm

**

[yardwork]

17. I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the internets!

[Selatius]

2. It would be another step towards a totalitarian police state masquerading as a democracy.

Sure, you can vote, but you have no real choices, and everything you do is monitored.

[OmahaBlueDog]

3. Scalia has already said he sees no Privacy right in the Constitution

There are, of course, protections against self incrimination, unreasonable search, boarding troops, etc.

Bottom line: The right to sexual privacy (same sex relations, birth control, abortion, etc. ) would likely become a state issue. This means that little would change in Hawaii or California, but anti abortion and sodomy laws would reappear in much of the nation.

[Lyric]

4. It would mean that every single one of us would be SCREAMING at our Congress critters

to start the process for a Constitutional amendment that explicitly states, "The right of privacy in ones person, papers, effects, and finances shall not be infringed upon by the Federal government, nor by the states, nor by any law or business, without due process."

I think that one big reason why that HASN'T been proposed as a Constitutional amendment yet is because it would knock the credit reporting agencies right out of business. It would hamper the ability of insurance companies to screw people over, and it would basically nullify three-quarters of the Patriot Act.

Sounds good to me.
:thumbsup:

[no_hypocrisy]

5. Probably the first item on the checklist.

Next, ban birth control including for married couples.

Next, re-criminalize homosexuality.

Next, re-criminalize adultery. While getting worthy Congress critters in jail any way you can is amusing, it's criminalizing morality which is unacceptable.

It could very ugly. Especially as we've witnessed a moribund democratic majority of Congress these past two years.

[Bake]

13. A lot of Repukes would go to jail!

Hehe!!

Not that they wouldn't enact those laws anyway -- they think the laws don't apply to them.

Bake

[Yavin4]

6. The End Result Would Be That Some States Will Become Theocracies

while others remain democratic. Once they lose their bread and butter, Roe v. Wade, then they will have to get another one, which will be prayer in school. Then it will be mixing religious and public institutions. Finally, full fledge Theocratic state governments.

[DemoRabbit]

7. My answer...

I just did a blog post about this and I posted it here too a few days back

http://rabbitpolitics.blogspot.com/2008/09/questions-for-anti-choice-crowd.html

[melody]

9. People would flock to liberal states and we'll reap the bounty

That's short term. Long term, it will (as all "states rights" movements will) lead to civil war.

[DailyGrind51]

10. Women would be unable to make decisions regarding their own bodies,

which is much more important than whether or not calling Palin a "bitch" is "sexist"!

[Winterblues]

12. It won't be reversed. what would Republicans use to fool the gullible?

Republicans need the Abortion issue desperately. They have no other issue to run on.

[lib2DaBone]

14. Somewhat off topic.. but what if Sarah Palin...

....decides that a nukular exchange (sic) is peachy keen. She already said that she thinks that is a good idea. Enough radiation released into the biosphere.. and all humans cook inside their own juices... like a giant micro wave oven. Suddenly, the abortion idea is moot..? What say the Fundies? I wonder..

[Mari3333]

15. someone said something interesting to me today

he said "the republicans, when they are in office, and they have been for 8 years, and more if you count other administrations, always SAY they will outlaw abortion but they never do, because thats the issue they NEED to run on. they use it, so they keep it legal to keep getting elected." made sense.

[lifesbeautifulmagic]

16. I shudder to think of what would happen regarding employment/labor

issues as well. Goodbye minimum wage, discrimination laws, unions, and so on.

One thing I would like to add is that for many years when the possibility of overturning RvW would come up, the standard reply is that it would "just go down to the states", as if the answer would be to travel to a different state if need be. Don't think for a second that the anti-choice states wouldn't criminalize traveling across state lines for the purpose of obtaining an abortion, thereby making abortion truly illegal for residents of certain states.

And in addition to the privacy thing, I don't think that anti-abortion laws would be enforced by mandatory pregnancy reporting laws, but would be enforced by a network of spies and 1-800-reportanaborter lines, making for a very ugly society, and the possibility of forensic uterus inspectors.