• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

Though she voted not to reopen the landmark Roe v. Wade abortion decision, one of the judges on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals nevertheless hammered the Supreme Court that handed down the original ruling, saying it was an “exercise of raw judicial power.”

The three-judge appeals panel dismissed the case, which was designed to overturn the 1973 decision, Wednesday, saying the issue was moot because it did not present a “live case or controversy.” The case had been brought by Norma McCorvey, the woman who was represented as “Jane Roe” in the original case but since then has become an avid pro-life activist.

In her concurring opinion, Judge Edith Jones lamented the case was moot, which prevented McCorvey’s evidence from being heard: “If courts were to delve into the facts underlying Roe’s balancing scheme with present-day knowledge, they might conclude that the woman’s ‘choice’ is far more risky and less beneficial, and the child’s sentience far more advanced, than the Roe Court knew.”

Jones wrote, “The perverse result of the Court’s having determined through constitutional adjudication this fundamental social policy, which affects over a million women and unborn babies each year, is that the facts no longer matter. This is a peculiar outcome for a Court so committed to ‘life’ that it struggles with the particular facts of dozens of death penalty cases each year.”

Commented Benjamin Bull, chief counsel of the Alliance Defense Fund: “The judge’s comments are on the mark. Roe v. Wade is the perfect example of what can result from judicial activism – in this case, the deaths of millions of Americans.”

McCorvey’s attorneys say they will likely appeal the case, Norma McCorvey v. Bill Hill, to the Supreme Court.

“That the Court’s constitutional decision-making leaves our nation in a position of willful blindness to evolving knowledge should trouble any dispassionate observer not only about the abortion decisions, but about a number of other areas in which the Court unhesitatingly steps into the realm of social policy under the guise of constitutional adjudication,” Jones wrote.

As WorldNetDaily reported, earlier this year McCorvey began a quest to reopen the case that struck down all state laws restricting abortion, based on changes in law and new scientific research that make the prior decision “no longer just.”

Among McCorvey’s 5,437 pages of evidence are affidavits from more than 1,000 women who testify having an abortion has had devastating emotional, physical and psychological effects.

McCorvey announced in 1995 she had become a Christian and later launched a pro-life ministry called Roe No More. She told WorldNetDaily three years ago she was “used” by abortion-rights attorneys in their quest to legalize the procedure.

Related stories:

Court changes mind in ‘Roe’ case

Court to hear ‘Roe’s’ challenge to ’73 ruling

Court says ‘too late’ to reopen ‘Roe’

‘Roe’ sues to overturn Roe v. Wade decision

The real ‘Jane Roe’

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.