You Ain’t Gonna Like This
But Dobbs wasn’t about abortion
As I prepare to burst a whole lotta bubbles out there, let me explain and apologize.
First, while I’m an old guy out of the baby boomer generation, I married a woman who is full on supportive of Women’s Rights, and I had three daughters, now all grown. In fact, I’ve been surrounded by women my entire life, and completely and totally support the rights of women in every way, up to and including their exclusive right to abortion and the decisions surrounding that procedure. They are and should remain, full on equal American citizens.
But my concern over the danger from Authoritarianism in this country forces me to speak out on this issue. In my favor, I’m not the only one to mention this, but you don’t hear it much.
So before I go on, I apologize if I say anything here that pisses you off. Please, sit back, swallow that anger for a few minutes, and then decide if its still warranted. If so, blast away in the comments, please.
In his majority ruling in Dobbs, Alito made it crystal clear that the right to privacy is not enumerated in the US Constitution, in his opinion. Later, I’ll explain why this non-lawyer disagrees and why, but for now, let’s move on.
Why is that important? Because in the Roe vs. Wade decision, SCOTUS based the right to abortion on women’s rights to make their own private decisions about their medical care. Let me repeat that for emphasis:
"SCOTUS based the right to abortion on women’s rights to make their own private decisions about their medical care.”
Yes, the part about “women’s rights” is there, and yes, it is pretty clear that one can base that on the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection before the law.
But, you’ll notice if you read his decision overturning Roe, Alito left that out. That’s because they’ve got plans for that.
The Dobbs decision isn’t just about abortion, it’s about privacy.
That means that if they wish, Congress (if dominated by right wing authoritarians) can pass a law forcing corporations that make our phones to provide a back door for the government to be able to listen in on your conversations at will, and without a warrant. And they’ll do that knowing that someone will file an appeal to a lawsuit against that law that SCOTUS will then use the Dobbs decision to make that law Constitutional based on there being no “right to privacy.” Some precedent, huh?
It won’t remain limited to purely medical decisions, either. If there’s no right to privacy in the US Constitution, then damn near anything the government wants to do is then legal. Why do I say that?
Well, go take a look at the Bill of Rights. Those are bedrock rights we’ve depended on for generations to protect us from an overbearing government. Right to free speech, freedom of the press, freedom to gather together, freedom of and from religion. Rights to carry a gun, to not have troops quartered in our homes, the requirement for the government to need a warrant to search the PRIVACY of your home and your person.
But if the government starts to base all of its actions in those situations on privacy, and there’s no right to privacy in the Constitution, all that goes away, because all of that is based on your rights to make private decisions, and to have privacy in your home and on your person. The private decision to associate with certain people or to worship according to your own private decision. The right to walk down the street without the cops stopping you twice in every block.
Remember, the word private here doesn’t mean hidden behind closed doors. It is in reference to your ability to make decisions yourself with no input from others. Made inside your own head.
If that right doesn’t exist, then the entire basis of what our government is designed around goes away. Why is the government forced to be controlled by elected representatives? Because you have the right to decide for yourself who you want to do that. You’re an American citizen, and the government acts and even exists within the bounds of your authority as a citizen, and the controlling authorities are there because you made a private decision on who to vote for. Why is its power restricted?
Well, why isn’t the government allowed to restrict your interstate travel? That’s not enumerated in the Constitution, is it? No, but then the 9th Amendment says that there are rights in the Constitution that aren’t specifically stated, and it preserves those rights. Privacy is what allows you to do these things, based on your private decisions, needs, and desires.
The Founders, in spite of their RWM wanting to control things, did realize that the majority of citizens needed the assurance that the government wasn’t going to get all up in their business, as the monarchists had in Britain. After all, even as the controlling class, there had to be rules they could point to to ensure their own rights separate and apart from their social class.
All of the restrictions on governmental power is based on the American Peoples’ rights to live their private lives without undue interference from a governing power, except where their actions affect others or society in general, as in public safety. That’s the overarching purpose of having that Constitution in the first place. Remember, the one thing the Founders were leery and afraid of was a tyrant taking over, as had happened in Europe. Those restrictions on government authority were intended to prevent that.
When SCOTUS tells us there’s no right to make our own private decisions about anything as important as medical care, all of that goes away like a puff of smoke, and they can extend that to virtually every aspect of our lives.
And the United States Constitution becomes little better than a wad of toilet paper.
So, what’s the fix?
If we keep pushing the abortion aspect of this, the Democratic Party is going to push that as the fix, and the fight over privacy continues.
But, if we fix it with a Constitutional Amendment that enshrines privacy as a right in so many words, suddenly, Alito’s ruling becomes unconstitutional and the Roe ruling is back in force, and as a bonus, we’ve saved everything about the Constitution that makes it work.
Again, I don’t want you to think that this is to denigrate women’s rights in any way, because it isn’t. But if we ignore the broader implications of Alito’s words, we cannot truly fix the problem.
And this is a problem that badly needs a permanent fix, and not one that passes a contentious issue down the road to unborn generations to fight over. Believe me, if there’s one thing that the current population of these United States sees as important, it’s our privacy.
Right?
