Supreme Court’s move on abortion rights ominous, warns FFRF’s Seidel

1AndrewSeidelPresskitThe country has been rocked by the unwelcome news that the U.S. Supreme Court will take up an abortion rights case this term. FFRF’s Director of Strategic Response Andrew L. Seidel has explored in a new column another aspect of this alarming development that hasn’t quite made the mainstream media narrative.

Religion Dispatches has published Seidel’s latest op-ed on this subject, “First Roe, Then Contraception: Unless Action is Taken, Supreme Court is About to Strike Down Fundamental Rights of American Women,” which begins:

Sixteen days before Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, the Supreme Court scheduled a conference on a case that could end the reproductive freedom of 170 million American women. Ginsburg died on Sept. 19, 2020, and the conference, set for Sept. 29, that would decide whether the high court would hear this pivotal case, was postponed. And then postponed again. After delaying and rescheduling more than 20 times, the Supreme Court decided Monday to take Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a case out of Mississippi orchestrated specifically to challenge Roe v. Wade.

The chances that this challenge will be successful have dramatically increased now that Amy Coney Barrett has replaced RBG. It’s easy to imagine that the justices were waiting to see what would happen with the election and any possible new justice before taking the case, then giving it some space from Barrett’s confirmation. But Barrett was put on the court to write the opinion that overturns Roe, as many, myself included, warned after Barrett’s nomination. Christian Nationalist preacher, Fox News contributor, and Trump bootlicker Robert Jeffress was explicit on Fox the other night when discussing this case: “We’re gonna see now what the justices do and if they uphold their part of the deal.” This was “the deal.” Trump and McConnell put you on the court, you end Roe.

The point is to have a woman author the opinion that takes away all women’s reproductive rights. This gives Jeffress and white evangelicals — the only religious demographic in which a majority supports outlawing abortion — a simple counterargument that their audience will eat up: “How can the decision be anti-woman if it was written by a woman?!”

They’re gunning for Roe. And after that, they’re coming for contraception.

The piece is packed with information. Seidel also cautions people against looking to Chief Justice John Roberts as a savior here. “It’s not gonna happen,” he remarks.

Seidel does offer a solution — one that will take a lot of work and activism on our part. So please read the piece on Religion Dispatches and then share it on your social media so that people are aware of just how much is at stake and how we can solve the problem. Then maybe start calling your senators.

Freedom From Religion Foundation

Send this to a friend