Connect with us

Features

The Politicization of the Supreme Court of the United States

Published

on

The Leaked Opinion of Ruling Against Reproductive Freedom

by Vijaya Chandrasoma

The radical right’s aspirations for control of the US Supreme Court since the 1970s, and the ongoing wet dream of Republican leader of the Senate, Mitch McConnell, are both now a fait accompli. The radical right will have control of the Court for the next few decades, considering the ages of three Justices with right wing values appointed by a treasonous president. And a fourth Republican Justice, Clarence Thomas, whose wife, Ginny Thomas, was actively and seditiously involved in the January 6 insurrection in the effort to violently overturn the November 2020 presidential election.

According to Article II of the Constitution, Justices to the Supreme Court are nominated by the sitting president, confirmed by the Senate. The framers of the Constitution envisaged a Court, representative of the will of a majority of the American people, with Justices appointed and confirmed by presidents who enjoyed the support of the majority of Americans.

Not so, today. Due to the archaic system of the Electoral College, added to the completely lopsided system of representation in the Senate, the current Supreme Court represents a minority of American voters. Two Presidents, Bush Jr. and Donald Trump, who both lost the popular vote to Al Gore (2000 – by 500,000 votes) and Hillary Clinton (2016 – by 3 million+ votes), respectively, have been responsible for the nomination of four Justices, with meagre legal qualifications but with a sycophantic commitment to the values of those espoused by the extreme right, Evangelical wing of today’s Republican Party. The Court now enjoys, and will enjoy for generations to come, a massive conservative 6/3 majority, composed of the Chief Justice and five Justices who do not represent the will of the majority of the American people.

The right to reproductive freedom has the overwhelming support of 80% of Americans, Republicans, Democrats and Independents. The 1973 Supreme Court ruling on Roe v. Wade, reaffirmed on numerous occasions in the past five decades, has been considered to be a super precedent, the law of the land. A ruling which serves to empower women with the nationwide right of choice for an abortion with no governmental restrictions.

Gun control regulations also have the support of 90% of Americans, but will never see the light of day because of the intransigence of a Republican Party venally ensconced in the deep pockets of the National Rifle Association. The complete lack of such regulations saw yet another racially motivated mass murder recently. An 18-year old white supremacist, armed to the teeth with military-style weaponry, killed 10 African Americans and injured three more at a supermarket, targeting a predominantly black community in Buffalo, NY.

The Supreme Court has already started to flex its newfound muscles with a leaked draft opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade, a ruling which has been unsuccessfully challenged by the Republican Party over the last 50 years. The current opinion is designed to leave the interpretation of abortion laws to individual states. 28 states controlled by the Republican Party will outlaw abortion immediately after the ruling is ratified. The remaining states, mainly in coastal areas controlled by Democrats, will retain their existing laws permitting abortion under varying circumstances. It is estimated that 36 American million women will lose their right to choose under this ruling.

Strangely, Republican Justices, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett, who, like all other Justices underwent a scrutiny of their impartiality in the Senate before confirmation, averred, under oath, that they considered Roe v. Wade an established precedent, and had no intention of overturning it. A complete falsehood, possibly tantamount to perjury, as is evinced by their endorsement of the current leaked opinion.

Outlawing legal abortion will not do away with unwanted pregnancies. Pregnant women financially able to travel interstate will still be able to choose to get an abortion in a state that honours reproductive freedom. However, those who are too poor to so travel, women from rural states in the Republican controlled heartland of America, usually blacks and minorities, will be compelled to resort to illegal, unhygienic, back alley abortions conducted in conditions with enormous risks to themselves and to the unborn foetus.

Extracts from the leaked draft resolution authored by Alito:

“We hold that Roe and Casey (another defeated challenge by the right to overturn abortion rights) must be overruled. It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives”.

The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any Constitutional provision. Alito counters that “although some rights are not mentioned in the Constitution, such rights must be deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and traditions and implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.”

Alito and his radical Justices choose to ignore the fact that the words “deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions” referred to such traditions prevalent during an era in, and context of, the ratification of the Constitution in 1788. Many other freedoms, not referenced in the Constitution, in fact, freedoms specifically denied by it, have, in the past two+ centuries, become deeply rooted in the nation’s history and traditions, and enacted into the nation’s laws. Laws like all women’s right to vote, Blacks to have their humanity increased from 3/5 to 1.0 of a man, civil rights and Jim Crow laws to end segregation, voting rights, the rights of the LGBTQ community and gay marriage are such deeply rooted freedoms which are now the law of the land.

If the Supreme Court is successful in overturning women’s rights of reproductive freedom, there is no doubt that they will next be encouraged to overturn the hard fought freedoms referred to above, especially voting rights, the rights of the LGBTQ community and gay marriage, freedoms which are being bitterly contested by the current Evangelical Republican Party.

The main argument about abortion is when a foetus becomes a human being. Scientifically, up to four weeks, an embryo is just a complex of cellular elements. The brain, spinal cord and heart begin to develop around the fifth week; a foetal heartbeat may be detected by vaginal ultrasound after 5-6 weeks of gestation, which US Christians regard as “ensoulment”, a concept deeply rooted in religion and faith. However, the brainstem of the foetus is fully developed around the 28h week, when doctors are able to monitor foetal brain activity.

All the great religions practiced in the world today are Pro Life, the only difference being the reasons and the stage of the pregnancy for justification of its termination. The Bible is often quoted by the Evangelical right as evidence to justify abortion being the equivalent to murder (thou shalt not kill), although the Good Book makes absolutely no reference to abortion.

According to the Bible, Genesis 2.7, “Then the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being”. In fact, one Mosaic law contradicts that the Bible is anti-abortion, clearly stating that miscarriage (which abortion also is, miscarriage by choice), does not involve the death of a human being. Judaism considers the foetus to be part of a woman’s body until the baby is born.

Catholics also believe that life begins at conception. It also believes that salvation and entry into heaven hinges on the sacrament of baptism. This is a central tenet of the Church. However, the Church conducts baptism only after the child is born. It doesn’t baptise an unborn or stillborn foetus. So a foetus which does not make it to childbirth for any number of tragic reasons is presumably denied salvation and entry into heaven.

Though Hinduism and Buddhism have clear Pro Life positions on abortion, involving the concepts of Ahimsa, Karma and reincarnation, the agreed stipulation is that the final decision whether to terminate the pregnancy should be left to the pregnant woman. The Dalai Lama believes that abortion has negative karmic consequences, as it interferes with the cycle of birth, life, death and rebirth. However, he believes that abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each individual circumstance.

One school of thought on Islam teaches abortion is unlawful as a foetus becomes a human being “once the drop of the man had mixed with the blood of the mother”; another believes that “a foetus becomes a living soul after 16 to 20 weeks’ gestation”. According to yet another source, abortion should be determined entirely on the threat of harm to the mother.

In atheistic, scientific reality, a foetus becomes a human being only after birth, when the infant takes his/her first breath, just as death is confirmed when a person takes his/her last breath. Your birthdays are celebrated not on the day your father successfully fertilized your mother’s egg, nor on the day your heartbeat was heard through a sonogram. Your birthdays are celebrated on that wonderful day your parents held you in their arms for the first time.

Roe v. Wade ruled that the decision to allow a woman the right to legal abortion was not just about the age of the foetus. The circumstances of the pregnancy (rape, incest, etc.) were also taken into consideration, as were the dangers of a continuing pregnancy to the health and well-being of the pregnant woman and/or the foetus.

With the proposed opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade, this Supreme Court may rule that abortion will be illegal, under all circumstances and at any stage of the pregnancy. Life, a gift from God, begins at fertilization, with no regard to the circumstances which caused the pregnancy. I am only surprised these religious kooks in Justices’ robes do not consider that life begins at erection.

Considering the most gruesome scenario, this draft opinion against abortion will compel a 12-year-girl, raped by a monster or family member, to carry the baby to childbirth, and gaze upon the eyes and features of her rapist all her life. An unwanted, even hateful tragedy which may prove to be a disaster for both the 12-year old child and the newborn infant.

There is no woman in the world who would want to terminate the life of the foetus growing inside her, unless there are circumstances which would make her life, or that of the unborn, totally unbearable. That decision, those circumstances and that choice, is hers, and hers alone, in consultation with her doctor and her God.

If the US radical right has genuine claims to be Pro Life, they will make benefits like extended periods of maternity leave, help with free care of the newborn child, its health and education. Also they will provide all assistance necessary to the mother whom they have forced to carry the infant to full term to pursue her own personal dreams.

But they will not, not in the USA, anyway. These Evangelical Republicans are not Pro Life; they are simply Pro Birth. Their interest in the well-being of the mother and the infant disappears after birth. Both the mother and the child will be abandoned to fend for themselves as best they could.

This leaked document is only a draft opinion, with no legal status. But there is a silver lining. The implied opposition to overturn Roe v. Wade, a ruling which has the support of the vast majority of Americans, may so incense voters of all stripes to support the Democratic Party in the midterms in November 2022. The attempt to overturn Roe v. Wade might well be the first nail in the Trump Republican coffin, and present the Democrats the opportunity of holding, even adding to, their majorities in the House and the Senate in November, a prospect projected to be highly unlikely before this leaked draft opinion emerged to overturn Roe v. Wade.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Maduro abduction marks dangerous aggravation of ‘world disorder’

Published

on

Venezuelan President Maduro being taken to a court in New York

The abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by US special forces on January 3rd and his coercive conveying to the US to stand trial over a number of allegations leveled against him by the Trump administration marks a dangerous degeneration of prevailing ‘world disorder’. While some cardinal principles in International Law have been blatantly violated by the US in the course of the operation the fallout for the world from the exceptionally sensational VVIP abduction could be grave.

Although controversial US military interventions the world over are not ‘news’ any longer, the abduction and hustling away of a head of government, seen as an enemy of the US, to stand trial on the latter soil amounts to a heavy-handed and arrogant rejection of the foundational principles of international law and order. It would seem, for instance, that the concept of national sovereignty is no longer applicable to the way in which the world’s foremost powers relate to the rest of the international community. Might is indeed right for the likes of the US and the Trump administration in particular is adamant in driving this point home to the world.

Chief spokesmen for the Trump administration have been at pains to point out that the abduction is not at variance with national security related provisions of the US Constitution. These provisions apparently bestow on the US President wide powers to protect US security and stability through courses of action that are seen as essential to further these ends but the fact is that International Law has been brazenly violated in the process in the Venezuelan case.

To be sure, this is not the first occasion on which a head of government has been abducted by US special forces in post-World War Two times and made to stand trial in the US, since such a development occurred in Panama in 1989, but the consequences for the world could be doubly grave as a result of such actions, considering the mounting ‘disorder’ confronting the world community.

Those sections opposed to the Maduro abduction in the US would do well to from now on seek ways of reconciling national security-related provisions in the US Constitution with the country’s wider international commitment to uphold international peace and law and order. No ambiguities could be permitted on this score.

While the arbitrary military action undertaken by the US to further its narrow interests at whatever cost calls for criticism, it would be only fair to point out that the US is not the only big power which has thus dangerously eroded the authority of International Law in recent times. Russia, for example, did just that when it violated the sovereignty of Ukraine by invading it two or more years ago on some nebulous, unconvincing grounds. Consequently, the Ukraine crisis too poses a grave threat to international peace.

It is relevant to mention in this connection that authoritarian rulers who hope to rule their countries in perpetuity as it were, usually end up, sooner rather than later, being a blight on their people. This is on account of the fact that they prove a major obstacle to the implementation of the democratic process which alone holds out the promise of the prgressive empowerment of the people, whereas authoritarian rulers prefer to rule with an iron fist with a fixation about self-empowerment.

Nevertheless, regime-change, wherever it may occur, is a matter for the public concerned. In a functional democracy, it is the people, and the people only, who ‘make or break’ governments. From this viewpoint, Russia and Venezuela are most lacking. But externally induced, militarily mediated change is a gross abnormality in the world or democracy, which deserves decrying.

By way of damage control, the US could take the initiative to ensure that the democratic process, read as the full empowerment of ordinary people, takes hold in Venezuela. In this manner the US could help in stemming some of the destructive fallout from its abduction operation. Any attempts by the US to take possession of the national wealth of Venezuela at this juncture are bound to earn for it the condemnation of democratic opinion the world over.

Likewise, the US needs to exert all its influence to ensure that the rights of ordinary Ukrainians are protected. It will need to ensure this while exploring ways of stopping further incursions into Ukrainian territory by Russia’s invading forces. It will need to do this in collaboration with the EU which is putting its best foot forward to end the Ukraine blood-letting.

Meanwhile, the repercussions that the Maduro abduction could have on the global South would need to be watched with some concern by the international community. Here too the EU could prove a positive influence since it is doubtful whether the UN would be enabled by the big powers to carry out the responsibilities that devolve on it with the required effectiveness.

What needs to be specifically watched is the ‘copycat effect’ that could manifest among those less democratically inclined Southern rulers who would be inspired by the Trump administration to take the law into their hands, so to speak, and act with callous disregard for the sovereign rights of their smaller and more vulnerable neighbours.

Democratic opinion the world over would need to think of systems of checks and balances that could contain such power abuse by Southern autocratic rulers in particular. The UN and democracy-supportive organizations, such as the EU, could prove suitable partners in these efforts.

All in all it is international lawlessness that needs managing effectively from now on. If President Trump carries out his threat to over-run other countries as well in the manner in which he ran rough-shod over Venezuela, there is unlikely to remain even a semblance of international order, considering that anarchy would be receiving a strong fillip from the US, ‘The World’s Mightiest Democracy’.

What is also of note is that identity politics in particularly the South would be unprecedentedly energized. The narrative that ‘the Great Satan’ is running amok would win considerable validity among the theocracies of the Middle East and set the stage for a resurgence of religious fanaticism and invigorated armed resistance to the US. The Trump administration needs to stop in its tracks and weigh the pros and cons of its current foreign policy initiatives.

Continue Reading

Features

Pure Christmas magic and joy at British School

Published

on

Students of The British High School in Colombo in action at the fashion show

The British School in Colombo (BSC) hosted its Annual Christmas Carnival 2025, ‘Gingerbread Wonderland’, which was a huge success, with the students themseles in the spotlight, managing stalls and volunteering.

The event, organised by the Parent-Teacher Association (PTA), featured a variety of activities, including: Games and rides for all ages, Food stalls offering delicious treats, Drinks and refreshments, Trade booths showcasing local products, and Live music and entertainment.

The carnival was held at the school premises, providing a fun and festive atmosphere for students, parents, and the community to enjoy.

The halls of the BSC were filled with pure Christmas magic and joy with the students and the staff putting on a tremendous display.

Among the highlights was the dazzling fashion show with the students doing the needful, and they were very impressive.

The students themselves were eagerly looking forward to displaying their modelling technique and, I’m told, they enjoyed the moment they had to step on the ramp.

The event supported communities affected by the recent floods, with surplus proceeds going to flood-relief efforts.

Continue Reading

Features

Glowing younger looking skin

Published

on

Hi! This week I’m giving you some beauty tips so that you could look forward to enjoying 2026 with a glowing younger looking skin.

Face wash for natural beauty

* Avocado:

Take the pulp, make a paste of it and apply on your face. Leave it on for five minutes and then wash it with normal water.

* Cucumber:

Just rub some cucumber slices on your face for 02-03 minutes to cleanse the oil naturally. Wash off with plain water.

* Buttermilk:

Apply all over your face and leave it to dry, then wash it with normal water (works for mixed to oily skin).

Face scrub for natural beauty

Take 01-02 strawberries, 02 pieces of kiwis or 02 cubes of watermelons. Mash any single fruit and apply on your face. Then massage or scrub it slowly for at least 3-5 minutes in circular motions. Then wash it thoroughly with normal or cold water. You can make use of different fruits during different seasons, and see what suits you best! Follow with a natural face mask.

Face Masks

* Papaya and Honey:

Take two pieces of papaya (peeled) and mash them to make a paste. Apply evenly on your face and leave it for 30 minutes and then wash it with cold water.

Papaya is just not a fruit but one of the best natural remedies for good health and glowing younger looking skin. It also helps in reducing pimples and scars. You can also add honey (optional) to the mixture which helps massage and makes your skin glow.

* Banana:

Put a few slices of banana, 01 teaspoon of honey (optional), in a bowl, and mash them nicely. Apply on your face, and massage it gently all over the face for at least 05 minutes. Then wash it off with normal water. For an instant glow on your face, this facemask is a great idea to try!

* Carrot:

Make a paste using 01 carrot (steamed) by mixing it with milk or honey and apply on your face and neck evenly. Let it dry for 15-20 minutes and then wash it with cold water. Carrots work really well for your skin as they have many vitamins and minerals, which give instant shine and younger-looking skin.

Continue Reading

Trending