Justice Samuel Alito’s leaked abortion decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization seems to have put many pro-life policy advocates in a rush to enact newer, stricter laws prohibiting doctors from performing abortion procedures. But by Justice Alito’s legal logic, all of us, the born and the unborn, are not much more than an aborted fetus. To be pro-life, one’s view of law and the constitution must go much deeper than prohibiting abortion procedures.

I am delighted that the U.S. Supreme Court appears poised to reverse its abortion precedents, Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. The opinion does a great job dismantling the faulty historical analysis employed in Roe between abortion and its treatment under the common law. However, one thing I have not mentioned previously was particularly grievous to me in two ways.

People have begun to protest the leaked U.S. Supreme Court decision that would overrule Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey outside the homes of several Justices. I believe the Court has been fostering for decades the climate of threats and violence the Justices are now experiencing for the following reasons.

Pro-life advocates are naturally excited that the United States Supreme Court may be ready to reverse its abortion-rights jurisprudence.  But I found the leaked opinion amusing.  One such amusement was the Court's opening and closing its opinion with the assertion that abortion presents a “profound moral question” and then proceeding to ignore it. Truthfully, Justice Alito’s opinion is more despicable and disgraceful than the Court’s treatment of slaves and their descendants in the infamous decision involving slave Dred Scott.

Today I want to speak to what a non-Christian friend calls “the Church that’s substituted Mr. Nice for Jesus Christ” and, using Jesus’ own words, consider how He might have responded to those in American society complaining about their oppression and victimization. I suspect those of the Church of Mr. Nice and those to whom it seeks to appeal would be horrified, and they, along with the others, would “cancel” Him again. It may even happen to me.

I got a text from a state legislator on Wednesday that read, “How can a [U.S.] Supreme Court decision overrule our state Constitution? The [U.S.] Supreme Court has been wrong on Roe v Wade, Dred Scott and many others.” I get this question and others like it quite often. If you don't know the answer or if you mistakenly think the answer is "the Supremacy Clause," read on. The right answer is important because when you don’t know the rules of the game—which is what our state and federal constitutions are—then, in time, you will lose on every political issue you care about.

The presidential election is over. The results, however, are not final as a matter of law. I don’t know whether the voter fraud that accompanies all elections will prove sufficient to change the media-predicted results in this election, but something more than ballot integrity is on the line -- the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court. And it may do itself in for generations to come.

Monday, the United States Supreme Court issued a judgment based upon the word “sex” in Title VII, the federal law prohibiting workplace discrimination, having a meaning it did not have when it was enacted in 1964 and one that isn’t even its primary dictionary meaning now.