top of page
  • Writer's picturePhilip Drucker

Communique "Pages 33-34, Footnote 46" 5-14-2022

“Pages 33-34, Footnote 46”

I believe in context. How about you? Yes? Good! Then let’s look at Alito’s leaked for whatever purpose 98-page debacle of an “opinion” I’ve ever been forced to confront. My first observation? Anything but Justice Alito doesn’t like Abortion, or Contraception, or Probably Sex in general and certainly among the LGBTQ Community, dogs, cats, pets (aka living things), tofu, green veggies (he seems to have accepted the sickly orange carrot up his @ss), and freedom.

I believe context also demands acknowledgment of the corrupt on steroids out-of-control condition the Roberts Court finds itself. The lack of oversight has allowed for political hackery at the highest judicial level by political hacks including incompetent and clearly willing to show it Sammy “The Altar Boy” Alito.

Ceding that any opinion that needs to draw reference to 1600 era America, much less earlier English scholars who might have had some interest in commenting on abortion, but also rather fancied the idea of burning witches at the stake for a basis of 21st Century jurisprudence does bear a second, perhaps more critical look?

As we venture into the weeds, I mean the text of the all-but sure to be released with minor changes at best, draft opinion let’s begin with “the footnote”, that along with the filibuster is going to magically change the USA into a White Wing Evangelical Wonderland where, I imagine there will be no more use of Disneyland, noting again sarcastically that Old Walt did not hide his let’s call it disdain, although he took their money at the ticket box, for the Children of Israel.

You know, Footnote 46? The one that will despite all rational thought to the contrary will literally unravel our Right to Privacy, Familial Rights, including but not limited to contraception, procreation, abortion, LGBTQ Rights, Transgender Rights (We do have those, right?), Right to Same-Sex Marriage, miscegenation, and coming to a mega-church near you, interfaith-marriages.

Now, I think it’s fair “Sammy End o’ Times” would rather you skip over the “legalese” if you can call it that to realize all our Rights to Privacy, including those associated with the bedroom, are an extension of our Natural Right to Liberty, in this instance the right to be free from unwanted government intrusion in the form of unregulated surveillance be it at the federal, state or local levels.

The rest of the case law and precedent? Window dressing for overturning a 50-year-old precedent without any reasonable authority for doing so. Time grows short. The powers that be (those with the moolah and twisted desire forced birth as law) have apparently reached the decision it is now or never, at least for their latest acts of lawlessness and court mandated sedition.

I can see it now. Something about activating sleeper-cell agent Alito into action. His mission? Imagine a running back on receiving the kick-off from their rivals. He has but one thought on his mind. How do I get from the 20-yard line and into the enemy’s endzone? A block here, a dodge or two, faster, slower, inflated football, illegal face mask, or two, some call it landing the plane, but I prefer the football analogy.

I wonder if Alito will get caught with an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty for dancing in the endzone after the fact. Nah, that would probably be Beer-Breath Brett, the walking talking turn the SCOTUS into a tailgate party while he leaves the heavy lifting to the adults he can’t stand. You know, women.

Yet it is a single phrase from the now infamous footnote “domestic supply of infants” that continues to draw the most controversy. Why? I would think most Americans advocate for adoption.

“Do we have or need a supply and demand domestic (admittedly, difficult to swallow) and if so, how does abortion affect this issue?” I believe these would be the better questions to ask as a starting place for analysis.

But as with most battles of the sexes, the focus is not on effect, but on a he-said-she-said emphasis, for what reason, except possibly to muddy the waters with a bit of “fact-checking” as the result, regardless of the source of the earlier speakers has no relevance as it won’t change a darn thing and, if anyone asks, here’s why.

It is virtually undisputed the original source quote came from a report generated by the CDC (yes, that CDC), “Adoption experiences of women and men, and demand for children to adopt by women ages 18-44 in the United States; data from the National Survey of Family Growth” by Jones, Jo, Ph. D (2008).

I also invite you note with interest writing the description of the document, is a not too subtle nod to racism in child selection.

“…the demand for children to adopt by women, and women's preferences (emphasis) for characteristics of the adopted child.”

Now tie it in with domestic (not foreign) supply (sale on aisle 5) of infants (not children). You can infer further, or before I get any hate-emails read the report for yourselves. Think of it this way, if you do, you’ll be one of the few who did.

I might also note one of the reasons for the decline in domestic supply was a law giving first rights to any newborn to the family before offering them to the greedy bigoted housewives that wanted a child that looked like them and did not remember they had a “real” mother. Just saying.

By including, or rather adopting the language and citation into his opinion, Alito has tacitly if not fully embraced the concepts therein, including domestic supply as meritorious for discussion, in deciding whether, as an abundance of sources have reported, Amy Coney Barret’s (the one with the Red Filigree) assertion, that “safe haven” laws have negated the need, or burden (a loaded word for sure) of abortion.

As a response, perhaps something along the line of when you are an honorable member of the SCOTUS, you wrote it, you own it. Is that going to happen with Sammy “The Mole” Alito? H-E double hockey sticks I tell you. Remember, as noted above, this is the guy who has a permanent orange carrot stuck up his rectum. Need I say more?

And here’s where things get serious for throughout the opinion little to no deference is given to the Second Framers who enacted the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments (not good suggestions) to the Law of the Land.

The scope of the intent behind the Post-War Amendments all debate aside, is not open for debate. It was to give the newly freed slave an opportunity to become American citizens and all the concomitant rights associated with being a citizen of the United States without out meddling states trying to bring back the ante-Bellum lifestyle as quickly as possible.

You know, Black Codes, Jim Crow 1.0, Tom Cotton, er, Jim Crow 2.0 and negate any possible effects of the Reconstruction. These were (did I say were?) the times where the South chose to hide itself behind a veil of righteous half-truths (at best) about “The Lost Cause”.

These let’s be kind and call these misrepresentations, included the benevolence of the KKK, slaves were better off and happier on the Plantation, and physically building monuments for traitors who broke their sacred oaths to the Constitution for purposes related to maintaining the obscene institution of slavery.

You know them. Did you notice the Confederate Battle Flag waiving inside the Capitol Building on January 6th? Next to the Trump Flag? Along with various Nazi inspired hate flags of various overt and hidden meanings?

Might we mosey through the posies for a spell and take a gander at the 13th Amendment, specifically when coupled with the phrase “incidents and badges of slavery”? I’ll be your huckleberry.

In short, again let’s try simple English, this hallmark feature of the 13th Amendment acknowledges and placed into law Congress’s ongoing obligation to monitor and continue its effort toward the eradication of slavery in the United States.

It has not been seriously doubted these measures include nullifying the discriminatory actions of individuals, in tandem with or separate from any unconstitutional laws as subject to the 14th Amendment. The 15th Amendment specifically addresses minority voting rights at the State level. With the proliferation of anti-voting rights legislation, you would think the 15th Amendment didn’t exist. But then again, if you claim to be an originalist, a time where only white men seized of property could vote, you’d be right.

For as a matter of history, the Civil War was still four score and seven years in the future. Convenient, isn’t it? That darn Lincoln! Had to go and win his war. An inconvenient truth if there ever was one.

Today, slavery may be illegal, but we can still fell the visceral reactions to

actions in the form of “incidents and badges” we know are subject to 14th Amendment review and if necessary, condemnation. This is where it all gets legalized, disgusting and sad, right here, right now, all at the same time.

For the record, I posit the following hypothesis, still alive and kicking after the quickening. Namely, every act of attempted or accomplished slavery begins with a cruel separation of parental bonds that is ultimately subject to the self-serving justification that indentured servants/slaves, you pick your name, are better off socially, spiritually and economically, as property.

Now, as distasteful as it is, property is one thing, but what happens when humans become a commodity? A commodity being a generic category of goods where the distinction between products is for the most part indistinguishable from one another. Darned predatory capitalism. Can’t even be 3/5th of a person (Dred Scott ring a bell?) these days.

This is not idle chatter about chattel. While debating aloud, the way it used to be, in 1863, Rep. T.D. Eliot of Massachusetts put it this way while debating the Freedmen’s Bureau Bill, stated:

“Slavery cannot know a home. Where the wife is the property of the husband’s master, and may be used at will; where children are bred, like stock, for sale; where man and woman, after twenty years of faithful service from the time when the priest with the owner’s sanction by mock ceremonies pretended to unite them, are parted and sold at that owner’s will, there can be no such thing as home. Sir, no act of ours can fitly enforce their freedom that does not contemplate for them the security of the home.”

In Narrative of William W. Brown, a Fugitive Slave. Written by Himself, Brown, as part of the Preface, quotes the admonitions of J.C. Hathaway’s words written in 1874, of almost prophetic as in Nostradamus future relevancy.

Recently, United States of America v. Hatch, 722 F.3d 1193 (10th Cir. 2013) a modern Circuit Court of Appeals cited with approval the original intent behind the continuing enforcement powers of Congress and its original source Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3, 4 (1883).

Why not admit forced birth followed by the possibility of adoption is a “choice” that inevitably, unless society suddenly finds its conscience and changes it adoption policies dramatically, is designed with as little respect, and in fact, quite a bit of disdain for the promulgation of the biological family? Why love the fetus and hate the child indeed?

Why give rights to rapists and those who practice incest? Why has the life and well-being of the birth mother suddenly become a scenario that should the mother, mother-to-be, wife, sister, caretaker of the elderly within the family unit, dies, and trust me when I say forced abortion deaths will happen, what are the realistic, potential harms due to the insane and immoral removal of a core family member?

What are the deleterious effects on the remaining possibly devastating consequences visited on the surviving members of her family (mind you, with or without the newborn in tow, watch for that too) and why hasn’t more attention been placed upon protecting the family for what could be for what could be the slippery of all slippery slopes?

Shouldn’t the continuation of the of the Natural/Biblical right to pursue happiness, by going forth and multiplying at the time of wanting and certainly not in all cases subject to forced coercion by the State, given the time, effort and consideration it so obviously deserves?

Isn’t it time we use our ongoing post-war amendment powers We, the People gave Congress to eliminate even the appearance of forced birth in all instances surely as similar a crime against nature as forced sterilization, hatred disguised as benevolence, accusations of illegitimacy, poverty and murder to demonize abortion? Economic justifications for separation of the family? Say, doesn’t that sound familiar?

Gut punch anyone? Or do you prefer a bloody and that isn’t tomato juice mint julep with your sanctimonious, prejudice? Mojito anyone? Same thing, less sugar (what a surprise). Who is in the mood for some reproductive justice at the ballot box? Comments?

Like My Blog? Buy Me Some Justice? Coffe is liberation!

11 views1 comment

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page