It is really a testament to how uninformed American voters are when they elect people to congress that have no understanding of the Constitution, have not even read it much less understand it. Pamela Jayapal of Washington is just one of those who sadly is constitutionally illiterate. Here is what she recently stated.
Rep. Jayapal claims Supreme Court justices 'do not have the right' to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Jayapal emphasized the "terror," "fear," "disgust," and "outrage" she feels over the draft opinion and its "rebuke of precedent."
"This is a stunning, stunning rebuke of precedent and of the fundamental freedom that women have to make choices about our own bodies and our own futures and our own economic security," Jayapal said on "CNN's Newsroom."
While several argued that this draft opinion represents a sense of "fascism" in the court, Jayapal argued that the Supreme Court doesn’t even have the right to overturn Roe v. Wade as "settled law."
"These justices are acting like this is somehow something that they have the right to change. They do not have the right to change this which has been settled law for two generations now of people who have grown up and have gone through their twenties in the firm belief that they can make these decisions about their own bodies," Jayapal said.
"The only thing that has changed is the makeup of the Supreme Court, the radicalization of the Supreme Court. And if they can do this for this issue, it means that they can ignore precedent for every other issue that we have considered settled law. So, we cannot accept it. I don’t think people across this country are going to accept it, and of course, we have to now work extra hard to codify Roe v. Wade in the United States Congress," she said.
Jayapal is wrong about the Supreme Court Justices not having the right to overturn Roe v. Wade. No where in Article 3 of the constitution does it prohibit the court from reversing a previous opinion they have rendered. It has been done many times. Nor does the constitution recognize or sanctify precedence. It appears that each case must be weighed on the specifics of that case.
Jayapal also said that Roe v. Wade was “settled law.”. The fact is that Roe v. Wade was never law. No where in Article 3 does the constitution grant the Judicial Branch the power to make law. Article 1, Section 1 of the Constitution states: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”
The Constitution only grants legislative powers or the power to make law to the Congress of the United States. When the Constitution states “all power”, it leaves no room for exceptions. The Judicial Branch and the Executive Branch have no power to make law. The courts opinions are not law. Executive orders and regulations are not law.
Yes Jayapal, the court is purported to have ruled that the federal government does not have the jurisdiction to override the states if they determine that killing babies should be illegal, which would reverse the opinion the court had rendered in Roe v. Wade. They have every Constitutional right to reverse a previous ruling.
No Jayapal, Roe v Wade was not “settled law”, whatever that is, it was not law of any kind. The only way murder of the unborn or newly born could become law, would be if both houses of congress passed a bill declaring murdering babies to be legal and then it was signed by the executive.
Sadly Pamela Jayapal, you are like so many people in Congress, the overwhelming majority of Americans, who have no understanding as to what the Constitution states. There is no excuse for you and your fellow congress members.
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.