Justice Clarence Thomas: Abortion is “Without a Shred of Support From the Constitution’s Text”

National   |   Steven Ertelt   |   Jun 29, 2020   |   12:40PM   |   Washington, DC

Over the years, Justice Clarence Thomas has become the most vocal Supreme Court member to remind his fellow jurists that there is no right to abortion in the Constitution. Today, as the nation’s highest court overturned a pro-life Louisiana law that saves babies from abortion and protects women’s health, Justice Thomas reminded his colleagues again that a so-called right to kill unborn children in abortions is simply not found in the text of the Constitution.

As LifeNews reported, Chief Justice John Roberts joined the four abortion advocates on the nation’s highest court to strike down the law. He said the high court is required to follow precedent in a prior Texas case that struck down a similar Texas law also requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges to care for women victimized by botched abortions.

In dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote, “Today a majority of the Court perpetuates its ill-founded abortion jurisprudence by enjoining a perfectly legitimate state law and doing so without jurisdiction.”

“Our abortion precedents are grievously wrong and should be overruled,” he added, saying that the high court has “neither jurisdiction nor constitutional authority to declare Louisiana’s duly enacted law unconstitutional.”

Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and videos.

Thomas’ dissent makes it clear that the abortion activists who brought the lawsuit didn’t even have standing to bring it, since petitioners who file lawsuits are supposed to bring such suits on their own behalf concerning their own abrogated rights or grievances, not on behalf of others.

Thomas made that problem clear: “As is often the case with legal challenges to abortion regulations, this suit was brought by abortionists and abortion clinics. Their sole claim before this Court is that Louisiana’s law violates the purported substantive due process right of a woman to abort her unborn child. But they concede that this right does not belong to them, and they seek to vindicate no private rights of their own. Under a proper understanding of Article III, these plaintiffs lack standing to invoke our jurisdiction.”

The venerable Supreme Court jurist then made it crystal clear that there is no right to abortion in the Constitution: “Those decisions created the right to abortion out of whole cloth, without a shred of support from the Constitution’s text. Our abortion precedents are grievously wrong and should be overruled.”