On Friday, the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade, the 1973 case that held that women had a Constitutional right to an abortion.
We had known that this was likely ever since a draft of the ruling was leaked a number of weeks ago, but I’d personally held out hope that the Court would relent and issue a narrower ruling that left Roe intact.
On a personal level, I hate this decision and find it to be immoral, out-of-step and vastly destructive. Those who are impacted will be poor women in red states who struggle to access reproductive care or exert their own choices safely and effectively. I find it bizarre that supposedly conservative judges would overturn such a longstanding precedent with massive importance to the way of life of millions of Americans. Conservative typically means “respect institutions, including what has gone before you.” This isn’t that.
Indeed, this ruling seems to firmly cement the Supreme Court as a political institution as opposed to a judicial body. That’s intrinsically a bad thing.
|
|
Protests are now raging across the country. In the hours after the ruling, I received dozens of fundraising overtures from Democratic candidates across the country. I do think that this ruling has the potential to activate voters and energy in a way that may diminish what is expected to be a red wave in November.
But at the same time, I found myself wondering, “Why didn’t Democrats do something about this when they had the chance?” Democrats commanded legislative majorities multiple times over the last 49 years. They could have codified Roe v. Wade into law. They could have played hardball when Mitch McConnell refused to consider Merrick Garland, which I found to be incredibly cynical and corrosive. They could have asked Ruth Bader Ginsburg to step down while Obama was still in office instead of deferring to her wish to stay in until her health failed.
They didn’t do any of these things, and now the people who will pay the price will be poor women with limited resources in red states.
This ruling will categorically polarize the country for the worse. I fear for what’s left of our institutional trust which is diminishing quickly. I’m deeply saddened for the women and families who will be hurt and have their lives altered.
For me, the ruling only elevates the need for a political realignment and institutional reform. Judicial appointments are being made that cater to the desires of a relative minority of the country because that minority commands outsized influence in our unrepresentative two-party system with closed party primaries. Parties run on issues but don’t legislate. Failures fuel fundraising appeals. People become more angry and frustrated and inflamed and the two sides become more entrenched.
These are difficult times in the U.S. But we have to continue to live with each other and find avenues for coming together and allowing Americans to feel that they are being heard and respected on matters most dear to them, or we will see our country fail and ripped apart. There should be more than two parties at the table to make a more nuanced and representative case for the tens of millions of Americans who are now on the outside looking in.
Our system must evolve and move forward, even as forces seem intent on hurtling us backward and into opposing camps. Those forces are growing stronger. There is no time to waste.
|
|
Andrew Yang
Founder, Forward Party
forwardparty.com
andrewyang.com
|
|
|
|
|
