UncategorizedRoe V. Wade: The Power of the Supreme Court

May 4, 20221



Roe V. Wade has become again the hot topic of the day nationally after the leaks of the Supreme Court. It might bring out some good news but this is not the point that I would like to discuss here. Regardless of the outcome, I have always expressed my opposition to the ever-extending powers of the US Supreme Court.

Article 3 section 2 of the Constitution tells us that the Supreme Court should only consider cases that cannot be resolved locally at the state level:  –to Controversies between two or more States;–between a State and Citizens of another State;–between Citizens of different States;–between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.”

Therefore, I argue that the Supreme Court overstepped its powers when it ruled on Roe V. Wade and other similar matters.

The US Supreme must be restrained in its powers to what is outlined in the Constitution and as a last resort as was intended by the founding fathers. Hamilton remarked: “In the first place, there is not a syllable in the plan under consideration which DIRECTLY empowers the national courts to construe the laws according to the spirit of the Constitution, or which gives them any greater latitude in this respect than may be claimed by the courts of every State.”

Therefore, it must not be acceptable to allow the Supreme Court to have any power over any state that pertains to issues like abortion, LGBT,…etc. And it must definitely have no power whatsoever over the legislative body. These dangerous powers were realized by Thomas Jefferson when he wrote to Abigail Adams about a Supreme Court ruling:

“That instrument meant that it’s co-ordinate branches should be checks on each other. But the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional, and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action, but for the legislature & executive also in their spheres, would make the judiciary a despotic branch. Nor does the opinion of the unconstitutionality and consequent nullity of that law remove all restraint from the overwhelming torrent of slander which is confounding all vice and virtue, all truth & falsehood in the US. The power to do that is fully possessed by the several state-legislatures.”

I hope that I was successful in, briefly, explaining my previous statement when I said that the Supreme Court overstepped its power when it ruled on Roe V Wade. After witnessing the tyranny of 2020 I believe that we must start seriously discussing the powers of the US Supreme Court.


Support Ibra, Donate now!



One comment

  • Millard J Melnyk

    May 4, 2022 at 12:38 pm

    Any cogent argument to the effect that authority/power must be limited and restrained will, if not arbitrarily hamstrung, inexorably lead to the conclusion that governance, at any level and to any degree by any party, is itself the actual problem; because to govern at all entails the same violations of dignity, equity, and peerness being argued against when we (subjectively) deem the violations to be egregious. After 13000 years of failure of the governance model, the vacuous and ignorant but ever-pervasive protest, “But how could we live without government?” is repugnant, not just because it’s lame but because it shows absolutely no interest in actually finding an answer to the question. Supremism has always been a lie foisted by theatrics of violence by human rejects to whom control over life is more important than life itself — to whom life itself is a threat that must be controlled. In other words, governance is the inevitable “solution” to a”problem” that only arises in mentalities that are hysterically afraid of living as peers in an equitable world.


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.