Share This Episode
Family Policy Matters NC Family Policy Logo

Dobbs & Overturning Roe v. Wade

Family Policy Matters / NC Family Policy
The Truth Network Radio
December 6, 2021 10:59 am

Dobbs & Overturning Roe v. Wade

Family Policy Matters / NC Family Policy

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 437 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

December 6, 2021 10:59 am

This week on Family Policy Matters, host Traci DeVette Griggs welcomes Michael Farris, President of Alliance Defending Freedom, to discuss the potentially monumental U.S. Supreme Court Case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Farris unpacks the oral arguments heard by the Court last week and the likelihood that Roe v. Wade will be overturned.

What's Right What's Left
Pastor Ernie Sanders
Family Policy Matters
NC Family Policy
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Focus on the Family
Jim Daly
Line of Fire
Dr. Michael Brown
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

Family policy matters, and engaging in weekly radio show and podcast produced by the North Carolina family policy Council hi this is John Ralston presidency family and were grateful to have you with us for this week's program is our prayer that you will be informed, encouraged and inspired by what you hear on family policy matters and that you will feel better equipped to be a voice of persuasion for family values in your community, state and nation, and now here's our house to family policy matters Tracy to bedrooms. Thank you for joining us this week for family policy matters. If you've been paying attention recently.

You know that the US Supreme Court is considering a case that people on both sides of the aisle has a chance to overturn Roe V Wade and throw abortion regulation back into the laps of individual states that that's not all that's on the docket for this term that conservative family minded Americans should be watching were very fortunate to have as our guest today.

The president and CEO of alliance defending freedom.

Michael Ferris is here to discuss these important cases several in which ADF is actively involved Michael Ferris. Welcome to family policy matters. Great to be with you. When the grandchildren of the Raleigh area. Oh great, great. We are in the Raleigh area as well so hope they're listening course we have to start with what has become commonly known as the Dobbs case so I know you're paying close attention were involved with that case, what were your primary takeaways from that hearing, the longer I listen to you happier became the static above and beyond all that we could have the general of 50 who argued the case because there were actually fabulous job and made bold arguments to Winston Lee with appropriately conversational mild professional manner.

It was pitch perfect really strong arguments as to our good wishes which of your return to the other side agrees, in one sense and that is that it was, and all nothing moment that they were saying rose on the line and they were discussing the court to just simply uphold Roe. You would've thought that they might try for some halfway measures to resolve the case in a way that leaves Road basically intact, with some modifications, perhaps they didn't go for that.

The charges to preserve it in the most egregious court went so I believe that the court is certainly going to make a decision about whether they're going to do it and very, very strongly in some form below the dam to borscht 15 weeks is to be upheld whether it's all the way to reverse your broker's right wrist have to wait and see.

But six strong possibilities that will happen well.

So you're saying that I think I'm hearing this pretty clearly that these expectations of the possible overturning of Rosie Wade are not overblown. No, not at all well okay is very very possible that you mentioned a possible decision that substantially alters the effect of that abortion law without actually overturning it. So what you think the likelihood is then that that might happen instead of just going to reverse uphold Roe not going to be law, I would rate that is really really low, so that the alternative here is that they're going to modify the viability entered in some way, which the current regime is that viability is a line at the core user you originally will versus Wade.

It was trimesters first trimester since could do this for Mr. states to do that. Trimesters to state that they change that 1990s in the Planned Parenthood versus Casey model no reason viability as a standard will viability keeps changing because size keeps getting better medicine keeps getting better and so is proven to be really unworkable, so I might just take viability down as a standard altogether and make up some problems with doing that were pointed out by both sides, but I think that simply removing viability might be the alternative net result would be states would be given some greater latitude in regulating abortion, but probably couldn't bandit effectively and so it would be a model the mess frankly but that's a possibility.

So I think your point is is a great one when Rosie Wade and Casey were decided the technology was so much different.

We knew about the unborn child was so much different and that's a game changer is a net is well more than enough known for court got it right and will versus waiter plan.

Versus Casey but their excuses have become sooner over time to the point of being laughable and so it's so obvious what's going on so clear of the effect of all this on the baby and in any other context of thinking this kind of barbarity would not be allowed, but it is being allowed because that is the religion of the left woke and they are seeking to preserve their right to do what amounts to human sacrifices for the Grillo further their personal convenience. Just atrocious. And we gotta get this behind us and get on with the business of being a country that's about protecting life rather than taking it now.

I've been reading in the last few days. Some of the more liberal judges on the high court were quoted as saying that if early Wade is overturned, it will basically make a mockery of the US Supreme Court. So do you think that overturning this arch are significantly changing Rosie Wade would delegitimize the High Court in the eyes of many Americans. I'm talking both sides here.

Well, will the people who think the purpose of the court is to do what leftist want them to do. And then there people who legitimately believe that the actual purpose of the screen court but the wrong, and in what delegitimize the Supreme Court is the propensity to insert the cord into what the Constitution gives over to the democratic process to the process of state legislatures to the Congress, and so on.

Because number one rule. The Constitution is found in article 1, section 1. All was authority all power to make law is vested in Congress and the same thing as truth is in the state legislatures and so the Supreme Court should make law and everybody's heard the phrase in Roe versus Wade, the Supreme Court legalized abortion will Supreme Court legalize anything that's a job. Legislatures plain fact that the Supreme Court delegitimize itself made the decision of Roe versus Wade. What we really be doing is getting the Supreme Court out of the political business back into the business of being a Cornell there's other decisions they've made that can also be attributed to this but this is the pinnacle. This is the most important of these political type decisions that the Supreme Court is, is made and they would do far more to actually bring back legitimacy to the Supreme Court that any other thing that could possibly do a history right there is at least one other major example of this type of overarching ruling being reversed. Once it was discovered that it was really ill advised right. There's many, but one of the more famous was Plessy versus Ferguson which was the separate but equal doctrine. Screen court made up of thin air in the 1870s and finally in 1954 Brown versus Board of Education involving desegregation in public schools.

The court reversed Plessy versus Ferguson said it was wrong and you can say all the things that you want to say you trying to defend rose gold people relying on it is been there for a long time. All those things could be said about Plessy versus Ferguson something deeply wrong is wrong as a matter of constitutional law is wrong, morally you just have to fix it. And so the role of precedent or stare decisis, the technical term here is to signal let's be careful with not reverse things willy-nilly so you basically say are you really sure if the answer is you will really sure that that we wrong the first time. Then you reverse it. The Constitution is the highest law of the land, not Supreme Court decisions, and so if the Constitution concludes it will resume was wrong. We are to follow constitutional what Roe said were expecting to hear ruling in the Dobbs case in June tracked not later than June the more controversial decision, the more likely it is to be in late June, when the court what wraps up all of its business for each year by the end of June so many people have misconceptions that if early Wade is overturned, it will make abortion illegal. I for that so many times over the years but this is not the reality is that so what what will happen. Well, it will return the issue of abortion to state legislatures. There are about 10 to 12 states with laws in place that will be triggered by a reversal of Roe and abortion will become banned in those states who you know there's always some exceptions.

In most cases it life of the mother would be the exception and the other 3840 states you start off where abortion would be technically legal so but there be a number of those that were the state legislature will act pretty quickly and so I think a year year and 1/2 or so after a decision like this, you can see abortion illegal in probably about half the country 20 or 25 states and course the goal of pro-life organizations like the one that I hope to lead is to have the right to life protected in all 50 states with better take some time and will be a state-by-state decision.

Let's talk about some other things because the Dobbs case is not the only thing that conservative families need to be keeping an eye on regarding the US Supreme Court session.

What are some other things that we need time to watch for three cases pending the Supreme Court all involving the clash between religious freedom and LGBT claims. We have a case of Seattle for the Union Gospel Mission that will be before the court or conferences to decide whether to take the case or not and I Casey suffered aside LGBT person openly says they disagree with religious doctrine of the gospel mission in the hope that of the Union Gospel Mission changes is its doctrine. They applied for a job there and Union Gospel Mission said no we only hire people who grieve our philosophy because were all engaged in ministry here you have believe in what we believe and the Supreme Court of Washington unanimously ruled against the Union Gospel Mission after the trial court ruled for the for the mission. So were very hope the screen court to take that case and can protect the right of Christian ministries to hire people actually believing the Christian principles that the ministry since Ford is very similar case involving the collagen in Massachusetts, Gordon College has a professor that had a similar kind of situation they become clear that they were in an alternate lifestyle and they didn't agree with the mission and the doctrine of the collagen morning call expired them so that case is also pending before the court of the final one is called three of three creative clerk a website developer under Colorado law is required to develop websites for gay activist organizations even though they they don't agree with compelled speech of the Court of Appeals said we can compel you to speak a message you don't agree with that does not avail its First Amendment which is just an astounding claim and feel very very good about the chances of of the screen court taking that case and it could be the vehicle where the court finally squarely addresses the issue of what happens when there's a clash between freedom of speech, freedom of diligence and gay activist claims so all three of those cases are pending and will probably all be determined whether or not the courts would take them by middle to late January.

Well just about out of time before we go.

Michael Farris listeners go to get updates on all of these cases, but also information about who you are and how they can get help if they encounter some of these issues. Our website is ADF people to go there freshly looking actively for cases where people's children are being forced to be indoctrinated in critical theory, critical race theory, critical gender theory and were on the lookout for cases that the kinds of situations in any area relative to religious freedom right to life right through speech, please go to our website. Contact us to take a look at your situation. Michael Farris, Pres. and CEO of alliance defending freedom. Thank you so much for being with us today on family policy listing the family policy matter.

We hope you enjoyed the program and plenitude in again next week to listen to the show online insulin more about NC families work to inform, encourage and inspire families across from Carlotta go to our that's NC fax again for listening and may God bless you and your family

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime