Nancy Pelosi calls for eliminating filibuster to codify Roe, Kamala Harris disagrees | Latest News Headlines

Latest News Headlines | World News

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently called for the removal of the legislative filibuster ‘so we can restore women’s human rights’ after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, although Vice President Kamala Harris said she would not approve of such a move.

Pelosi laid out several steps Democrats should take in response to the court’s decision, which returns the abortion issue to the states, in a “Dear Colleague” letter.

Pelosi wrote that the Democratic caucus has “explored avenues to protect the health and liberty of American women,” including legislation that “protects women’s most intimate and personal data stored in reproductive health apps” and “ makes it clear that Americans have the constitutional right to travel freely and voluntarily throughout the United States. She added that the House must again pass the Women’s Health Protection Act to “enshrine Roe v. Wade in the law of the land”.

“It’s clear from the way Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell have stacked the Supreme Court that elections have ramifications,” Pelosi added. “It’s critical that we protect and expand our pro-choice House and Senate majorities in November so that we can root out the filibuster so that we can restore women’s human rights — and freedom for every American.”

Meanwhile, CNN’s Dana Bash said she asked the vice president if she would support a filibuster exclusion to codify Deer, but Harris said she “wouldn’t go there” because the Democrats don’t have the votes.

The vice president told Bash in an interview on Monday that she “couldn’t believe” that the Court “in fact took a constitutional right that had been recognized for half a century and took it from the women of America,” calling the decision “shocking”. ”

Bash asked Harris if the Biden administration would actively challenge state laws that make it a crime to help a woman travel to another state for an abortion.

Harris noted that President Biden “has made it clear that we will do everything in our power as an administration through the executive branch to ensure women have access to the medicines they need” and that they “will have the freedom to travel”.

She later added that if a woman is prescribed pills for a chemical abortion, she “should be able to access them without hindrance”.

When asked if the attorney general could expand abortion services on federal lands that are in and around states that ban abortion, Harris said that’s not an option currently being considered. discussion within the administration.

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) reportedly told a Washington Post reporter that the Biden administration should establish Planned Parenthood outposts around national parks.

Harris said Monday that “everyone has something at risk” now that the Court has overturned deer and encouraged people who are parents of sons to “think about what this means for your son’s life and what this will mean in terms of the choices he will have”.

She continued: “Think about it in the context in which they wrote this decision, including a concurring opinion which suggests that other rights, such as the freedom to make decisions. . . about when you are going to start a family, freedom and the right to make decisions about contraception, IUDs. What this will mean in terms of in vitro fertilization.

In his concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the Court “should reconsider” its decisions in Griswold v. Connecticut, Lawrence v. Texas, and Oberfell v. Hodges, which respectively established the right to contraception, to intimacy in the bedroom and to same-sex marriage.

Thomas’ reasoning was that the majority of the Court held that the right to an abortion was not a form of “freedom” protected by the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. He said the Court therefore had a duty to “correct the error” in the other three precedents, which relied on the same legal reasoning as Deer. He wrote that after “reversing these manifestly erroneous decisions, the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions” protected the rights established in the three cases.

Bash asked Harris if she thinks the Supreme Court is on the right track to overturning those three precedents as well.

“I really believe it’s not over,” Harris replied. “I think he just said the quiet part out loud, and I think that’s why we all really need to understand the significance of what just happened.”

Pelosi wrote in his “Dear Colleague” letter that legislation is being introduced to “further codify the freedoms currently enjoyed by Americans” and called Thomas’s deal “disturbing.”

Like Pelosi, Harris stressed the importance of voting in the upcoming midterm elections to “shift the balance and have pro-choice lawmakers who have the power to decide whether this constitutional right will be enshrined in law.”

More National Review

Breaking News Updates abc News


Not all news on the site expresses the point of view of the site, but we transmit this news automatically and translate it through programmatic technology on the site and not from a human editor.
Back to top button