News
Featured Image
 Shutterstock

You’re invited! Join LifeSite in celebrating 25 years of pro-life and pro-family reporting at our anniversary Gala August 17th in Naples, Florida. Tickets and sponsorships can be purchased by clicking here. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. (LifeSiteNews) — It took 49 years to overturn Roe v. Wade, but with principles laid out in the recent Dobbs v. Jackson decision, the legal landscape is now being paved for the rolling back of other U.S. Supreme Court decisions that many have dubbed leftist “judicial activism.” Were the Obergefell v. Hodges decision to be overturned, same-sex “marriage” would be illegal in most states after a short-lived tenure of only a few years.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures and Stateline research, 35 states currently have laws on the books against same-sex “marriage,” either in their constitutions, state legislation, or both. On the other hand, several states had legalized same-sex “marriage” even before 2015, including Massachusetts (which was the first to do so in 2003), Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, and Washington.

With the different political composition of the nation’s high court today in comparison to 2015, when Obergefell unilaterally swept aside state laws on the issue, increased attention is being afforded the very real possibility of the Supreme Court revisiting the case. Should Obergefell be overturned, the legislation and constitutional prohibitions of 35 states would become enforceable law, and the path would be open for other states to follow suite.

Jason Pierceson, a political science professor at the University of Illinois-Springfield and author of “Same-Sex Marriage in the United States: The Road to the Supreme Court and Beyond,” commented on the issue: “These constitutional amendments are still on the books and would likely be put in place. Most of them would arguably be in effect if the court overturns Obergefell.”

In his concurring opinion on the Dobbs case, Justice Clarence Thomas urged the court to revisit Obergefell based on the principles by which they had decided Dobbs. He indicated that just as abortion, being neither expressly mentioned in the Constitution nor hidden in its due process clause, was a matter falling properly within the jurisdiction of the states, so the other so called “rights” the court has fabricated from the due process clause should be returned to the states, such as same-sex “marriage.”

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: Stand WITH Justice Clarence Thomas, AGAINST Abortion Fanatics Like Hillary Clinton
  Show Petition Text
2545 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 4000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

Ever since the Supreme Court issued its landmark ruling overturning Roe v. Wade and returning the ongoing debate over the barbaric practice of abortion back to the states, left-wing zealots, politicians, and rioters have taken to the streets and the airwaves to fan the flames of division.

And perhaps no one has epitomized this unhinged rage more than twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Taking her anger out on Justice Clarence Thomas, Clinton has once again shown her propensity for bitterness, hostility towards our Constitution and rule of law, and hatred towards those with differing philosophies from her own.

Please SIGN and SHARE this petition in support of Justice Clarence Thomas against hateful attacks by radical liberals like Hillary Clinton.

The Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which saw a 6-3 majority rule in favor of overturning both Roe v. Wade and 1992's Planned Parenthood v. Casey, was a long time coming: In 1973, seven Justices of the Supreme Court (all males) created a phony constitutional "right" to abortion out of thin air, opening the floodgates to practically unfettered access to abortion across the nation and resulting in the killing of more than 60 million innocent, unborn babies in the nearly 50 years that followed.

But with Roe now out of the picture, this decision will officially fall back to the states, who, by way of their elected lawmakers, may now opt to permit, restrict, or even outright ban the practice of abortion altogether. 

And while the majority opinion in Dobbs was penned by Associate Justice Samuel Alito, most of the left's ire in the aftermath of its publication has been directed at a different Justice: Conservative constitutionalist Clarence Thomas, currently the bench's only African-American member, who wrote his own separate concurrence acknowledging other past cases which were decided on similar, constitutionally-lacking bases that could potentially be revisited in the future.

Perhaps no disgruntled abortion supporter has gone out of their way more to deride this ruling and Justice Thomas than former First Lady and Obama Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who let her utter contmept for the unborn, the Constitution, and Justice Thomas show in a CBS interview with Gayle King earlier this week.



In her deeply personal attack, Clinton claimed that Justice Thomas, a Yale Law School classmate of hers in the early 1970s (when Roe was first decided), was a "person of grievance for as long as I've known him. Resentment, grievance, anger."

She then went on to criticize the court's ruling in Dobbs, repeating without evidence that "women are going to die" as a result, all while (predictably) ignoring the potentially millions of unborn babies who will now live because of Justices' timely decision.

So while pro-abortion liberals like Hillary Clinton continue to lament the outcome of Dobbs and smear conservative Justices like Clarence Thomas with personal attacks simply for abiding by the text of the Constitution, the pro-life movement and millions of Americans who believe in the constitutional right to life can take pride in nearly half a century's work to achieve the end of Roe, and begin the real work of ending the barbaric practice of abortion in the United States.

Now is the time to put out-of-touch elitists like Hillary Clinton on notice that momentum is on the side of life once again and that America is rejecting the culture of death that has penetrated our way of life for far too long.

Now is the time to stand with pro-life, conservative constitutionalists like Justice Clarence Thomas!

SIGN and SHARE this petition in support of Justice Clarence Thomas against attacks from leftists like Hillary Clinton, and thank him for courageously standing up for life and the Constitution!

Thank you!


FOR MORE INFORMATION:

'Hillary Clinton attacks Clarence Thomas as a ‘person of grievance’ following Roe reversal' (LifeSiteNews)
 

  Hide Petition Text

“The notion,” Thomas wrote, “that a constitutional provision that guarantees only ‘process’ before a person is deprived of life, liberty, or property could define the substance of those rights strains credulity for even the most casual user of words … The resolution of this case is thus straightforward. Because the Due Process Clause does not secure any substantive rights, it does not secure a right to abortion.”

Drawing out the argument, Thomas applied it to the other “substantive due process precedents.” “In future cases,” he said, “we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous,’ … we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”

Help a brave therapist being attacked by Southern Poverty Law Center: LifeFunder

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

10 Comments

    Loading...