'I have the will to live': N.B. woman needs double lung transplant
A New Brunswick woman suffering from sarcoidosis, a disease that limits your lung capacity, is in need of a double lung transplant.
They are the most fiercely polarizing issues in American life: abortion and guns. And two momentous decisions by the Supreme Court in two days have done anything but resolve them, firing up debate about whether the court's Conservative justices are being faithful and consistent to history and the Constitution – or citing them to justify political preferences.
To some critics, the rulings represent an obvious, deeply damaging contradiction. How can the court justify restricting the ability of states to regulate guns while expanding the right of states to regulate abortion?
"The hypocrisy is raging, but the harm is endless," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Friday after the court released its decision on abortion.
To supporters, the court's conservatives are staying true to the country's founding principles and undoing errors of the past.
The court corrected a historic wrong when it voided a right to abortion that has stood for nearly 50 years, former Vice President Mike Pence said Friday. On Twitter, he said the decision returned to Americans the power to "govern themselves at the state level in a manner consistent with their values and aspirations."
Opponents of Roe v. Wade, the controversial 1973 ruling that upheld the right to abortion, say the Supreme Court back then did just what some accuse the majority justices of doing now, adapting and twisting legal arguments to fit political positions.
Members of the court's current Conservative majority, laying out their thinking in this week's decisions, have been quite consistent, sticking to the words of the country's founders and the precedents of history that reach back even further, those supporters say.
In both decisions, the majority makes the case that if a right is spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, the bar for any government regulation of that right is extremely high. But if a right is not explicit, state and federal governments have greater leeway to impose regulations.
To those who study the court, though, the reality is more complicated.
A number agree that, for all the controversy of the rulings, the majority justices at least followed a consistent legal theory in issuing the decisions on abortion and guns.
"I understand how it might look hypocritical, but from the perspective of the Conservative majority on the court, it's a consistent approach to both cases," said Richard Albert, law professor at the University of Texas at Austin. "I'm not saying it's correct, by the way, but from their perspective it is completely consistent and coherent."
Consistency, though, cannot mask the fact that there has been a seismic shift on the court since President Donald Trump appointed three conservatives. And that is likely to further muddy public perceptions of an institution that prefers to see itself as being above politics, court watchers say.
Both decisions "come from the same court whose legitimacy is plummeting," said Laurence Tribe, a leading scholar of Constitutional law and emeritus professor at the Harvard Law School.
The court majority's decisions on gun rights and the ruling a day later on abortion both rely on a philosophy of constitutional interpretation called "originalism." To assess what rights the Constitution confers, originalists hone in on what the texts meant when they were written.
Opinions by originalists are often laden with detailed surveys of history, as both these rulings are.
The bulk of Justice Clarence Thomas' opinion on gun rights is devoted to history and what it says about the Founders' intentions when they crafted the Second Amendment and when lawmakers crafted the 14th Amendment on due process in the 1860s. Thomas broached a long list of historical figures, including the English King Henry VIII, who the ruling says worried that the advent of handguns threatened his subjects' proficiency with the longbow.
The abortion ruling authored by Justice Samuel Alito similarly delves deep into the past, concluding that there was nothing in the historical record supporting a constitutional right to obtain an abortion.
"Not only was there no support for such a constitutional right until shortly before Roe, but abortion had long been a crime in every single state," Alito wrote.
This week's two decisions are more legally consistent than critics suggest, said Jonathan Entin, a law professor emeritus at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland.
"We can debate about the meaning of the Second Amendment, but the Second Amendment does explicitly talk about the right to keep and bear arms, whereas the right to abortion access is not explicitly in the Constitution," he said. "If that's where you are going to go, then maybe these decisions are not in such tension after all."
Not all observers agree.
"I think there is a double standard going on here," said Barry McDonald, a professor of law at Pepperdine University, reviewing the justices' arguments that both decisions are grounded in a strict reading of the law and of history. That logic is shaky, he said, given the conclusion by many legal historians that the right to bear arms in the Bill of Rights is, in fact, much narrower than the court majority insists.
Most ordinary Americans, though, will be unfamiliar with such intricate legal theory. Instead, many will size up the court's actions based on their perceptions of the justices' motives and the personal implications of the decisions, experts said.
Many are likely to view the rulings as the direct result of Trump's appointments and the justices' determination to carry out his agenda, making the court "more of an institution of politics than it is of law," McDonald said.
Tribe said the court's majority has embraced an imaginary past and its claims that is only upholding the law are false. The majority justices can assert that they have been legally consistent. But taken together, he said, the decisions on guns and abortion create a whiplash effect from a court that claims to be protecting individual rights, then effectively limited many Americans' control over their own bodies.
"I think the decisions point in radically different directions," Tribe said, "but the one thing they have in common is they are decided by a new, emboldened majority that knows no limits on its own power and is perfectly willing to toss over precedent in the name of a version of originalism that really doesn't hold together."
-------
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, CTVNews.ca wants to hear from Canadians who have had an abortion.
Did you struggle to access abortion services or information in Canada? Was it difficult to secure an appointment?
Tell us your story by emailing dotcom@bellmedia.ca, and include your name and location. Your comments may be used in a CTVNews.ca story.
A New Brunswick woman suffering from sarcoidosis, a disease that limits your lung capacity, is in need of a double lung transplant.
Pius Suter scored with 1:39 left and the Vancouver Canucks advanced to the second round of the NHL playoffs with a 1-0 victory over the Nashville Predators on Friday night in Game 6.
A Chinese truck driver was praised in local media Saturday for parking his vehicle across a highway and preventing more cars from tumbling down a slope after a section of the road in the country's mountainous south collapsed and killed at least 48 people.
York Regional Police say they are continuing to search for a suspect in an auto theft investigation who was captured on video running over a police officer in Toronto last month.
The adorable trio of child actors from the 1993 classic comedy 'Mrs. Doubtfire,' which starred the late and great Robin Williams, are all grown up and looking back on their seminal time together.
Video of a suspect lighting a Richmond Hill barbershop on fire earlier this week has been released by police.
Crucial witnesses took the stand in the second week of testimony in Donald Trump's hush money trial, including a California lawyer who negotiated deals at the center of the case and a longtime adviser to the former president.
A source close to singer Britney Spears tells CNN that the pop star is 'home and safe' after she had a 'major fight' with her boyfriend on Wednesday night at the Chateau Marmont in West Hollywood.
A Quebec man who pleaded guilty to threatening Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Premier François Legault has been sentenced to 20 months in jail.
Alberta Ballet's double-bill production of 'Der Wolf' and 'The Rite of Spring' marks not only its final show of the season, but the last production for twin sisters Alexandra and Jennifer Gibson.
A British Columbia mayor has been censured by city council – stripping him of his travel and lobbying budgets and removing him from city committees – for allegedly distributing a book that questions the history of Indigenous residential schools in Canada.
Three men in Quebec from the same family have fathered more than 600 children.
A group of SaskPower workers recently received special recognition at the legislature – for their efforts in repairing one of Saskatchewan's largest power plants after it was knocked offline for months following a serious flood last summer.
A police officer on Montreal's South Shore anonymously donated a kidney that wound up drastically changing the life of a schoolteacher living on dialysis.
Since 1932, Montreal's Henri Henri has been filled to the brim with every possible kind of hat, from newsboy caps to feathered fedoras.
Police in Oak Bay, B.C., had to close a stretch of road Sunday to help an elephant seal named Emerson get safely back into the water.
Out of more than 9,000 entries from over 2,000 breweries in 50 countries, a handful of B.C. brews landed on the podium at the World Beer Cup this week.
Raneem, 10, lives with a neurological condition and liver disease and needs Cholbam, a medication, for a longer and healthier life.