Supporting or denying abortion is not government's business

Along with millions of other Americans, I watched last week’s State of the Union Address. I’m not sure what I was expecting, but that wasn’t it. The President was uncharacteristically subdued. He didn’t pick any fights nor call anyone names. He was definitely un-Trump-like.

The Democrats and the national press hate everything the President does, so it was no surprise when they discounted everything he said. Republicans, on the other hand, proclaimed it to be the best speech since Gettysburg. To me, it was kind of bland. One short segment, however, jumped out at me.

For the first time that I can recall, the President took a pro-life stand and proposed a federal ban on late term abortions. I thought it was a gutsy move, and I was surprised when it drew applause from both sides of the aisle — with the notable exception of the white-clad female Democrats.

To oppose Roe v. Wade would be political suicide, but President Trump found a way to support the pro-life folks without threatening Roe v. Wade. In the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, the U.S. Supreme Court supported the mother’s right to abortion only through the first two trimesters. A much later decision extended the mother’s right to choose until the fetus is “viable,” whatever that means. Thus, the President is effectively doing an end run around Roe v. Wade.

Every Supreme Court nominee since 1973 has been vetted for Roe v. Wade. Brett Kavanaugh had to swear over and over that he had no intention of overturning the decision. If it were a solid decision, they wouldn’t worry about it. Frankly, however, their protests lead me to wonder if their fears are realistic.

We all have our personal opinions about abortion. Many would have us believe it is a strict “for or against” issue. In truth, most of us are somewhere in the middle.

I personally oppose abortion, but I am not the father of a pregnant teenage girl. I do not, and will not, judge those who wrestle with this difficult choice. I leave that to a much higher power.

My concern is not about choice, it is about the law. Feminists defend their right to abortion as rabidly as gun advocates defend the Second Amendment. The difference is that gun rights are law and abortion rights are not. Abortion rights come from a court decision and can be overturned just as easily by the whim of the courts.

I don’t pretend to be an expert on the Constitution, but I can read. The majority decision in Roe v. Wade was based on the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, an Amendment enacted following the Civil war to extend full citizenship to ex-slaves and guarantee full rights of citizenship to everyone regardless of race.

The Due Process Clause says the states may not, “deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” I don’t know about you, but I can’t find anything there about abortion. Many legal scholars believe as I do, that the Supreme Court wanted to rule in favor of the plaintiff and went beyond the Constitution to do so. That was wrong.

It would be just as wrong for the federal government to be allowed to ban third trimester abortions. Abortions are not the business of the federal government. If the federal government can go beyond the Constitution to regulate abortions, it can go beyond the Constitution to regulate other matters. That’s wrong.

The scope of our government is limited by the Constitution. It is the job of the courts to enforce those limits, not to expand them. If our nation is to survive, the courts need to do their job.

Frank Watson is a retired Air Force Colonel and long-time resident of Eastern Washington. He has been a free-lance columnist for over 19 years.