The overturning of Roe v. Wade starts the new Jane Crow

With the Supreme Court ready to overthrow Roe v. calf, access to abortion could soon be a thing of the past for millions of women and girls across the country. For many women, the means to travel and pay for childcare is a loss roe will be disruptive. For many poor women—especially poor women of color—the loss will be fatal. This is the coming of the new Jane Crow.

Certain aspects of the era of the new Jane Crow are already predictable. First, high maternal death rates will continue, and black and brown women will be disproportionately affected by these deaths. Medicaid will not be expanded in anti-abortion states, nor will benefits be increased to meet families’ needs.

Second, states will turn to civil and criminal penalties for women and girls who seek abortions through drugs or by traveling abroad. Even now, earlier roe fallen, the legislature is working on such legislation. Third, just as the Jim Crow era sanctioned racism and racial profiling, the Jane Crow era will be characterized by increased surveillance of pregnant women and the curation of laws, practices, and policies to justify the stalking, surveillance, and surveillance of women’s bodies . This is our near future.

We already know how dangerous pregnancy and childbirth can be. An American woman is 14 times more likely to die carrying a pregnancy than having an abortion — a fact recognized by the Supreme Court itself Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt only six years ago. In Louisiana, childbirth is about 57 times more dangerous than abortion for women. The risk of death is particularly high for black women – and especially in states that want to ban abortion. For example, according to the Mississippi Department of Health’s most recent Maternal Health and Mortality Survey, black women were responsible for “nearly 80% of pregnancy-related cardiac deaths” in the state; They also suffered from far higher rates of gestational diabetes, sepsis and bleeding. Black women in Mississippi are 118 times more likely to die from childbirth than from abortion. Being black and being pregnant in America is a deadly combination.

Some of this devastation is the result of the anti-abortion movement itself, and particularly its white male champions in state buildings throughout the South. For decades, these lawmakers have targeted abortion providers, robbing them of their ability to provide basic health services to poor women, including Pap smears, cancer screening, and contraception. Her efforts have helped make the United States the deadliest country in the developed world for getting pregnant.

Surely Judge Samuel Alito and the four judges out loud Politically, who voted to sign his draft opinion, are aware of this. But do they find such data relevant? Apparently not, as the draft opinion hardly recognizes the death of mothers – and only in relation to 1973, not 2022.

Alito’s draft Opinion is troubling for many reasons, including its fundamental assertion that constitutional rights do not exist unless expressly articulated or enumerated in the Constitution. (This principle challenges the legitimacy of the corporate religious personality — an artful invention of the law, innovated by Judge Alito himself in 2014 Burwell vs. Hobby Lobby, a case that gave religious liberties to for-profit corporations trying to restrict access to contraceptives for female employees in their insurance plans. Nowhere in the Constitution or the Restoration of Religious Freedom Act 1993 is it mentioned that for-profit corporations should have religious identities and freedoms. But here we are.)

Furthermore, despite Alito’s apparent commitment to originalism and textualism, one of the most striking omissions in his draft is the Constitution’s declaration that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States … are citizens of the United States.” The Constitution makes no mention of embryos, fetuses, or “unborn children.”

Perhaps most troubling are the authorities Alito turns to. Alito writes about and draws on “Blackstone, Coke, Hale and the like” — legal scholars who claimed that women had no independent existence alongside their husbands and fathers, were property, and could lawfully be corporally punished and even raped by their husbands. According to the English jurist William Blackstone, this was “for their protection and benefit; such a great favorite is the feminine sex of English laws.”

1736 Matthew Hale’s treatise Historia Placitorum Coronae (“The History of the Pleas of the Crown”) asserted that a woman could not be raped by her husband. Hale proclaimed that marriage conveys an unconditional consent: a woman has entered into a binding contract and “has thus committed herself to her husband, whom she cannot revoke.”

For centuries, US lawmakers and judges, like Alito, have relied on Hale to justify the most egregious harms inflicted on women. It wasn’t until the late 1990s that spousal rape was finally criminalized across the United States – as it was ultimately a state rights issue. Apparently, Alito is now proposing an approach that regulates states’ rights to rape and incest exceptions in abortion bans.

Leaving the protection of people who can become pregnant to the means of hostile state legislatures has been and will be disastrous. In the past, such approaches to state law have resulted in lower courts dismissing cases involving marital rape and incest. A century ago, in roll against roll, the Washington Supreme Court ruled that a girl could not sue her father for rape. The court claimed that this would disturb “domestic harmony”. But whose domestic harmony mattered? Certainly not that of the raped daughter. In making such decisions, states relied on the very sources now cited by Alito to subject women and girls to second-class citizenship. It is these men from another century who shape the bleak future. The overturning of Roe v. Wade starts the new Jane Crow

Jessica MacLeish

InternetCloning is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – The content will be deleted within 24 hours.

Related Articles

Back to top button