Sam Smith on the Tenth Amendment
A number of conservatives have suggested that reversing Roe v. Wade is not as important as many think since, if it were overturned, persons wanting abortions could just go to states that permit them. Aside from the fact that this argument ignores those without the funds for such a trip, there is another serious problem: the reversal of Roe v. Wade might soon lead to a law federalizing abortion standards. Bear in mind the federal government's role in other matters that should be none of its business such as medical marijuana or the danger that the court will outlaw euthanasia in states that would permit it.
As the Bush regime's gross intrusion into public education - and liberals' indifference to the 10th Amendment principles involved - illustrate, there is absolutely no guarantee that a GOP Congress would not pass a law outlawing abortion everywhere that would be upheld by the courts.
...[L]iberals have to stop disdaining the 10th Amendment that gives to the states and people powers that are not specifically granted the federal government. Gay rights, women's rights, environmental laws would not be anywhere near as far along as they are were it not for the examples set by states and localities while the federal government did little or nothing.
It would also give them the moral high ground to bitch slap the hypocritical lying bastards in the Federalist Society, Heritage Foundation, AEI, etc., who complain about "legislating from the bench" and call for "interpreting the Constitution as written." To much discourse from the left entails taking the neocons' hijacked self-descriptions at face value--e. g. "free market," "strict construction," etc.--and then attacking free markets and strict construction. They shouldn't be able to get away with associating themselves with such terms in the first place; they should be judged in terms of their own self-proclaimed values, and shown up for the frauds they are.
federalism , roe v. wade , liberals ,