White House and DOJ Declare Roe v. Wade Unconstitutional

Tweet

In a letter to Speaker John Boehner, the Attorney General explained the legal arguments that brought the president and the DOJ to this conclusion. "While the Department has previously defended Roe v Wade against legal challenges, recent lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of Roe v.Wade have caused the President and the Department to conduct a new examination of the defense of this provision. The Supreme Court has yet to rule on the appropriate level of scrutiny for classifications based on unborn status. It has, however, rendered a number of decisions that set forth the criteria that should inform this and any other judgment as to whether heightened scrutiny applies: (1) whether the group in question has suffered a history of discrimination; (2) whether individuals "exhibit obvious, immutable, or distinguishing characteristics that define them as a discrete group"; (3) whether the group is a minority or is politically powerless; and (4) whether the characteristics distinguishing the group have little relation to legitimate policy objectives or to an individual's "ability to perform or contribute to society. Each of these factors counsels in favor of being suspicious of classifications based on born or unborn status. First and most importantly, there is, regrettably, a significant history of purposeful discrimination against the unborn, by governmental as well as private entities, based on prejudice and stereotypes that continue to have ramifications today. Indeed, until very recently, states have "demean[ed] the[] existence" of the unborn "by making their existence indefensible under the law." ...the adoption of laws like those at issue in Roe v. Wade, show the group to have limited political power and "ability to attract the [favorable] attention of the lawmakers." "Roe v. Wade contains numerous expressions reflecting moral disapproval of unborn children and their potential intimate and family relationships -- precisely the kind of stereotype-based thinking and animus the (Constitution's) Equal Protection Clause is designed to guard against." "Much of the legal landscape has changed in the 40 years since the Supreme Court created a so-called 'right to privacy,' which has no constitutional basis and no tangible form. Various Supreme Court justices have previously ruled that laws authorizing the taking of the life of an unborn child are unconstitutional and Congress has forbidden the federal government from paying for abortions." Okay, this isn't a letter from Eric Holder to the Speaker. However the text of this discussion has been lifted from that letter and Roe v Wade has been substituted for the Defense of Marriage Act. But could this letter be sent under a Republican president and AG if it is within the President's powers to declare laws "unconstitutional"? How does this affect your current opinion on the recent decision by the administration to declare DOMA unconstitutional and refuse to defend it? If the president is allowed to take unto himself the power of the judiciary, to interpret the law and determine its constitutionality, then there is the real possibility that any president can declare any law he does not like "unconstitutional".