6/17/2003 06:24:00 PM
by The MinuteMan
Say, What? Jane Roe Wants Her Baby Back?
From the AP
, we learn that the woman who put the "Jane Roe" in Roe v. Wade is filing a lawsuit seeking to have the decision overturned.
I will let the lawyers tell us whether she has standing, whether there are "timeliness" issues, and whether this case has ripened.
My questions are simpler - who is backing her, and why now?
Her attorney is Allan Parker of the Texas Justice Foundation.
I have only spent about 45 seconds at their website, but I infer them to be a conservative legal group. Surprised?
Here is their mission statement
, and their specific activities relating to abortion.
Points 7 and 11 seem most relevant to the current lawsuit. And the real jackpot is their press kit on the Roe v. Wade filing.
Fly, legal eagles! Burrow, legal beagles! Relax, everyone else!
Secondly, why now? It would be interesting to know whether this specific legal effort has been brewing for a while, and has, by odd coincidence, just now reached the percoloation point. Conspiracy theorists (and I may become one - too late, I already AM one) will suspect that the timing of this lawsuit is tied to the ooohing and aahhhing about possible Supreme Court vacancies
this summer. I suspect that this publicity comes at a favorable, and potentially critical, time for the pro-life activists.
Finally, as an aside on media tilt, do both sides of this debate now hate the Associated Press? Here is the description of the former Jane Roe:
"Norma McCorvey, who joined the anti-abortion fight nearly 10 years ago and says she regrets her role in Roe v. Wade..."
Emphasis added. Anti-abortion? I thought they were pro-life. But for balance, how about this:
"Sarah Weddington, the abortion advocate and attorney who originally represented McCorvey, did not immediately return a call seeking comment."
What's this, "abortion advocate"? What happened to pro-choice, safe, legal, and rare, all that stuff?
This balanced media is killing me. Annoy me or pander to me, but choose.