Democrats Pathetically Try To Connect Abortion With Interracial Marriage

After a report claimed the Supreme Court is poised to reverse Roe v. Wade and return the abortion decision to the states, a Democratic lawmaker accused Republicans of wanting to outlaw interracial marriage.

“The Republicans will not stop at outlawing abortion. They want to prohibit interracial marriage,” California Congressman Eric Swalwell tweeted right after midnight on Tuesday. “Do you wish to preserve it? Then, if that’s the case, you should probably go vote.”

After Politico published a leaked draft Supreme Court opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito on Monday that stated the court had discovered its previous decision in Roe v. Wade to be incorrectly made, he accused the publication of spreading “fake news.” The document was later authenticated by Chief Justice John Roberts, who announced an inquiry into the matter.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a speech Tuesday responding to the Politico report that Democrats were “angry, disturbed, and deeply concerned.” In a separate joint statement with the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Democratic leaders condemned the impending Supreme Court decision as “one of the most damaging and worse decisions in modern history.”

“Every Republican Senator who backed Mitch McConnell and voted for Trump’s nominees will now have to defend themselves to the American public,” the Democratic leaders charged, hinting that preserving abortion rights would be a major focus of their efforts in the following midterm election.

As the election draws closer, candidates and political parties will continue to escalate their attacks on each other. Democrats plan on focusing largely on health care, but Swalwell’s claim that Republicans want to outlaw interracial marriage is ridiculous.

If the Supreme Court delivers a definitive conclusion that repeals Roe, privacy rights connected to marriage and contraception, as well as abortion rights, are at risk.

“One of the problems this court, many members of the court, have failed to recognize is that there is a constitutional right to privacy,” Biden added.

“It’s a big deal,” Mr. Crouch exclaimed. “If this decision stands, it is a significant change. All of your private life decisions, such as who you marry and whether or not you can get an abortion, how you educate your kid, and so on are being jeopardized.”

If Roe is reversed, the issue of abortion would revert to the states, where elected officials will once again have the authority to restrict or expand access based on popular demand.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, at least 13 states have so-called “trigger laws” that would enact abortion limits as soon as the Supreme Court invalidates Roe v. Wade. Another 13 states currently have statutes on the books restricting abortion access that either existed prior to Roe or had previously been blocked by courts.

Several Democrat-led states have indicated their intention to legalize safe havens for women who seek abortions. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has pledged to collaborate with state lawmakers on adding abortion rights to the state constitution, and other Democratic governors have made similar commitments.

Author: Steven Sinclaire