If the Supremes overturn Roe vs Wade they will lose all of the legitimacy they’ve spent the last 70 years building.
At that point the Court itself is fubar. It probably already is fubar since Trump anyway. Clarence Thomas and his wife’s Jan 6th involvement is just the cherry on top of a shit show.
In the end they are falliable humans like the rest of us so perhaps we hold too high an opinion.
The fact that liberals peg their views of the Supreme Court’s “legitimacy” on a cluster fuck of an opinion as Roe v. Wade speaks volumes.
Roe is so bad that it has long united libertarian conservatives (who hate it because it makes up a right out of thin air) and social conservatives (who had abortion on the merits).
In addition to that it manages to be wildly out of line with international norms, which:
1) Generally recognize abortion as an issue for the legislature.
2) Typically draw the line for elective abortions at the end of the first trimester, not viability. The abortion laws in Denmark, Germany, Italy, France, and Spain would be unconstitutional under Roe.
Those two examples are literally written down as amendments to the Constitution itself. If France or Germany wanted to amend theirs to reflect free speech and the right to bear arms,, they are free to do so. Likewise, if the Untied States wishes to enshrine a right to abortion analogous to free speech and arms bearing, it is also free to do so.
I'm not following how you think these are comparable.
I think I've actually asked you something like this before, but is there a compact way to write a constitutional amendment that creates a right to privacy?
At that point the Court itself is fubar. It probably already is fubar since Trump anyway. Clarence Thomas and his wife’s Jan 6th involvement is just the cherry on top of a shit show.
In the end they are falliable humans like the rest of us so perhaps we hold too high an opinion.