Roe v Wade: Settled law?

Actually, there is no such thing. If there were slavery would still be legal, women never would have gotten the right to vote segregation would still be the norm in any areas of our country. This is the most unsettled of laws because it simply does not pass Constitutional muster. Carson Hollaway at Catholicvote.org puts it very succinctly, I think.

  This week marks the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court case that imposed legalized abortion on the entire nation. Many Catholics will, as is proper, pay particular attention to the intellectually indefensible and morally disastrous core principle of Roe: that there can be a right to kill a human being who is not guilty of any crime and who is not an aggressor. It is also worth reminding ourselves, however, that Roe is also a train-wreck as an act of Constitutional interpretation. This is an especially important point for American Catholics, and all pro-life Americans, since it reminds us that the abortion right is not really part of our constitutional regime but instead an abuse of it.

Roe claims that there is a constitutional right to abortion. The obvious infirmity of this claim is — as Justice Scalia never tires of pointing out — that the word “abortion” is never used in the Constitution. The document is utterly silent on the question, which leaves states free to legislate on it according to their own best judgment.

Read the rest of this article here.