Open/Close Menu وکیل | مشاوره رایگان | وکالت | وکیل آنلاین

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell Told USA Today If the draft opinion is overturned this week, it is possible that Congress could pass a national ban on abortion. Facing Wade It becomes final. McConnell confirmed in the interview that nothing could stop such national laws. McConnell did not say whether he would call or plan for such a vote. He stated that it is legally possible if قليه Overturns. However, such a vote puts the Republican Party in an incomprehensible quagmire over its views in the region. For decades, Republicans have insisted that this is a state issue, not a federal one. It can also raise some difficult constitutional issues under federalism.

In an interview with USA Today McConnell, released Saturday, said:

“If the leaked opinion becomes final, the legislature – not just at the state level but also at the federal level – can certainly legislate in that area,” he said. “And if that was the final decision, it would be a point that needs to be addressed in any way in the legislative process. So yes, it is possible.”

The point is, if the constitution does not provide for the right to abortion, the region is prone to legal action at the state or federal level. Ironically, this is the position of Democrats seeking federal support for abortion to conquer states.

However, there are some constitutional questions that can be raised with federal support or a ban on abortion. These questions include how states may be required to enforce such a ban. The Framers were deeply concerned about this kind of federal encroachment on state authority, as James Madison spoke. Federalist No. 46. They set up a system to support the “refusal to cooperate with union officers”.

Such laws can illegally force states to enforce federal law – by raising so-called “command” issues that violate the protections of federalism. There may also be circumstances in which the withdrawal of government funds is considered so compelling that it is unconstitutional.

In 1992, at New York v. USA, The Supreme Court annulled part of the Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendment Act 1985. In 1997, at Prints v. United States, The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could not order states or cities to enforce federal laws. Independent Trade vs. Seblius(2012), the court ruled that the federal government could not force states to expand Medicaid by threatening to suspend funding for Medicaid programs. that in Murphy v. NCAA (2018), the Court reiterated that Congress could not take any action to “dictate what a state legislature could and could not do” in such policy or program disputes.

Ironically, if Republicans impose such a ban, it not only contradicts his long-held view of government rights in the region, but is based on a broader interpretation of intergovernmental trade (another view that has long been opposed by many Republicans). Under existing jurisdiction, Congress can claim that abortion has interstate elements due to individual travel and the involvement of the national medical and administrative departments.

It is not possible for Congress to pass such a federal ban. In fact, some Republicans will definitely oppose such a law as Sen. Susan Collins of Maine.

If it was a test balloon, it would quickly turn into a lead balloon. Pro-life members like Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Howley have already said they have Does not support a federal BASimilarly, Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson (R) Said on Sunday That such a national ban “contradicts what we were fighting for.”

Remarkably, McConnell reaffirmed that (unlike the Democrats) the Republican Party would remain on the sidelines even if it took control of the Senate. This effectively ensures that such a federal ban cannot be passed.

Write a comment:


Your email address will not be published.