State Asks Supreme Court to Overturn Roe v. Wade Decision Allowing Unlimited Abortions

State   Sarah Zagorski   Sep 15, 2015   |   7:04PM    Pierre, SD

In South Dakota, lawmakers have a passed a resolution asking the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider and overturn their abortion ruling in Roe. v. Wade. As LifeNews previously reported, Roe vs. Wade, and its companion case, Doe vs. Bolton, legalized abortion in all nine months of pregnancy and for virtually any reason in the United States.

According to The Washington Times, the three pro-life representatives who brought the 15-page measure forward, Roger Hunt (R-Brandon), Lynn DiSanto (R-Rapid City) and Kris Langer (R-Dell Rapids), believe their duty to protect the intrinsic rights of children and women have been blocked because of the High Court’s abortion decision in 1973.

On September 14, Rep. DiSanto said, “We believe there is significant, documented evidence that women are being harmed by the Roe v. Wade and related abortion rulings, and we would like the Supreme Court to look at that.”

The resolution passed the South Dakota state House of Representatives with a 60-10 vote and in the state Senate with a 25-9 vote. Additionally, the leaders of both chambers have signed the measure.

Rep. Hunt acknowledged that he doesn’t think he and his colleagues will receive a response from the Supreme Court; however, he believes their resolution will be read and “carefully considered.” He also said other states should consider similar resolutions.

Keep up with the latest pro-life news and information on Twitter.

Unfortunately, it is highly unlikely that the Supreme Court will overturn Roe. v. Wade because pro-abortion judges dominate the Court with a 5-4 majority, and in order to change that we need a pro-life president. Although pro-life activists have experienced significant victories by enacting state laws that protect unborn children and their mothers, it is critical that we elect a president in 2016 who will put pro-life judges on the Supreme Court, support legislation that would ban late-abortion and de-fund Planned Parenthood’s abortion business.

Here’s more on the resolution in South Dakota:

“The right and duty to preserve life cannot co-exist with a right or duty to destroy it … and long ago our law was required to choose life over death,” the measure says. The measure further notes the fallibility of the Supreme Court, and how it has overturned “no less than 233” of the high court’s prior decisions “because they had been incorrectly decided.”

These corrective actions demonstrate that “the Court must always be vigilant and introspective in revisiting past decisions when errors are brought to its attention,” the measure says. A requested comment from abortion rights leader, Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota (PPMNS), was not immediately available Monday.

However, PPMNS decried South Dakota lawmakers’ efforts to pass the concurrent resolution and urged people to sign a petition saying, “I want my elected officials to stop interfering in personal medical decisions.”

South Dakota media recalled that in 2006 and 2008, voters rejected measures that would have banned abortions except in exempted situations.

supremecourt13