ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

American Opinion: Protesting for Roe at justices' homes is self-defeating and wrong

Summary: The protesters argue that law doesn’t apply in this case because their intent is to express their fury, not to influence the upcoming decision. Even if that’s true, they miss a broader point. The potential loss of Roe is a huge issue that should be debated as an issue, not as a personal attack on individuals. What they’re doing is comparable to anti-choice demonstrators intimidating women as they enter abortion clinics.

A crowd gathers outside the Supreme Court on May 2, 2022, after a leak of a draft opinion indicates that Roe v. Wade will be overturned.
A crowd gathers outside the Supreme Court on May 2, 2022, after a leak of a draft opinion indicates that Roe v. Wade will be overturned.
Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times/TNS<br/><br/><br/>
We are part of The Trust Project.

The apparently pending Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade is an affront to women’s rights to biological self-determination and to all Americans’ rights to privacy. This is why wide majorities of the country oppose the coming reversal of Roe. But if that support is to remain strong and eventually translate into abortion-protection legislation, pro-choice forces must quit sabotaging themselves by engaging in threatening protests at justices’ homes — and the Biden administration must enforce federal law prohibiting such actions.

To be sure, the leaked draft of Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion, joined by four other conservatives on the court, is infuriating. In language berating and dismissive of a right that has been a cherished and transformative one to more than half the U.S. population for almost half a century, Alito effectively struck down the entire premise of a right to privacy implicit in the Constitution. Were he right (he’s not), other rights like access to conception, same-sex marriage and even interracial marriage could also be on the chopping block.

wct.op.americanopinion
American Opinion


Activists lately have staged protests outside the homes of Alito and other conservative justices. In response, Govs. Glenn Youngkin of Virginia and Larry Hogan of Maryland sent a letter this week to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland demanding that he enforce a federal law making it a crime to “picket” judges’ residences “with the intent of influencing” their decisions.

The protesters argue that law doesn’t apply in this case because their intent is to express their fury, not to influence the upcoming decision. Even if that’s true, they miss a broader point. The potential loss of Roe is a huge issue that should be debated as an issue, not as a personal attack on individuals. What they’re doing is comparable to anti-choice demonstrators intimidating women as they enter abortion clinics.

The key to keeping some legislative or other form of abortion rights in place is to convince the broad middle. Polls indicate moderates strongly favor keeping some level of abortion rights in force. If pro-choice activists want to keep that tentative majority alliance in place, the last thing they should do is present themselves as radicals who shout slogans at judges’ families in their homes in response to rulings they don’t like.

ADVERTISEMENT

Yes, as one protester told The Washington Post, there is something galling about the premise that “the Supreme Court wants to have domain over women’s uteruses and yet the sidewalk in front of their homes is somehow sacred ground.” It may not be sacred ground, but it is outside the legitimate parameters of debate and protest. For the sake of both political propriety and strategic effectiveness, those activists should keep to the Supreme Court steps.

This American Opinion editorial is the opinion of the editorial board of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

©2022 STLtoday.com . Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

______________________________________________________

This story was written by one of our partner news agencies. Forum Communications Company uses content from agencies such as Reuters, Kaiser Health News, Tribune News Service and others to provide a wider range of news to our readers. Learn more about the news services FCC uses here.

More editorials:
Recent editorials of other newspapers published in the West Central Tribune.
Summary: Yes, gas prices are tanking Biden’s approval numbers and, by extension, whatever chance Democrats still had to hold Congress in the midterms. This is bad for the party and, we’d argue, bad for the country. But turning to an idea that former President Barack Obama once correctly labeled a “gimmick” isn’t the way to regain the public’s trust.

What to read next
From the editorial: "Our visitors come by car (and in vans, campers, and trucks), and we can’t afford for them not to come. So if knocking 47 cents per gallon off the price of gas ensures they still do this summer, we have to scream out our support."
Summary: With the primary now just weeks away, the lack of a real discussion of issues is stunning, and depressing. It’s beyond comprehension that Missouri voters would consider a Eric Greitens who resigned his office in disgrace under so many clouds. He shouldn’t get near any elected office, or any position of responsibility.
Summary: West central Minnesota is blessed with great people, welcoming communities, blooming prairies, shimmering lakes and exciting community events. And the fishing is good as well.
Summary: The flashing-red warning here isn’t just that so many GOP candidates have embraced this anti-democracy strategy based on a plain lie. It’s that so many Republican primary voters have embraced those candidates. What does it say when a significant, often decisive portion of a major political party’s voters reward candidates who run on an assertion as obviously false as Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster? Republican leaders who still put country ahead of party should view this situation as a partywide emergency.