The verdict is in, and Roe v. Wade is now a dead letter. This is tremendous news for those of us who have felt the onerous burden of this usurpation by the Supremes these many years, and feel that the constitutional framework of our republic has been to this degree restored. But is it an unalloyed good? I argue that it is not; even though this decision to overturn Roe V. Wade was legally and morally necessary, the political implications are far from certain, and we should be wary of them.

If anyone had ventured to wager a year ago that Roe v. Wade would be overturned during the Biden administration, he or she could have gotten long odds. This is the same Supreme Court, after all, that cowered in the face of questions of election irregularities in 2020, so why think it would have the cajones to tackle this controversial issue now? But the fact is that it did. What will follow?

Let me repeat before I go on to examine this question, that morally and legally (constitutionally) this decision was absolutely correct, and Alito’s majority opinion is spot on, even though some of his historical claims have been directly challenged by mainstream media, and rendered, shall we say, problematic. No matter, the deed is done, as well it should have been. Roe v. Wade was a direct usurpation of state sovereignty by the US Supreme Court, and should never have happened in the first place.

But in the aftermath of this momentous decision, the following concerns necessarily arise:

• First and foremost, the question of privacy of medical decisions and bodily sovereignty, which had been overextended in the overturned ruling, but nonetheless provided grounds for those who oppose “vaccine mandates” with legal grounds. There is reason to fear that the overturning of Roe v. Wade will provide inroads for other federal government agencies to now insist that this right of privacy and the implied bodily sovereignty does not extend to the right to refuse a vaccine which is deemed by “authorities” to be in the interest of public health. This right may need to be legally reestablished, without extending it to the right to terminate a human life.

• The 2022 “red wave” predicted by virtually all political pundits may no longer be such a fait accompli. The Democrats are certain to use the reinstatement of “abortion rights” as their 2022 platform, and this may draw support from those closet supporters of this principle from all parties and independents. This may seem hard to believe, but supporters of a “right to abortion” cross party lines, and for many of them the overturning of Roe v Wade represents a crisis that trumps party loyalty. Neither “Trump derangement syndrome” nor the January 6 “insurrection” memes have worked out for the Democrats, but the reversal of the Supreme Court decision may well serve up the electorate that they are otherwise likely to lose given the Biden regimes’ controlled demolition of the American economy.

• In a related vein, the prospect of “packing” the Supreme Court by increasing its number to 15, floated by some Democrats during the 2020 election, may resurface as a “heroic” effort to salvage the Biden regime in the eyes of voters with pro-abortion sympathies.

• The original Roe v. Wade decision can be seen as the crowning glory of the neoliberal extension of the New Deal ideology…. which had the fundamental purpose of making life for the working class liveable under capitalism. According to this view, women were given a fail-safe backstop for birth control via abortion, relieved of the burden of uncontrolled motherhood, which had previously exempted them from the workforce. Freed then to offer their labour to capitalists in competition with men, and at cheaper prices, this provided a temporary solution to capitalists, who were then presented with an expanded and cheaper work force. As outsourcing of American industry to third-world countries has since provided a more efficient and enduring solution, this newest of new deals no longer holds much relevance from the capitalists’ perspective. Hence the support for the original decision, the fount of radical feminist ideology, has waned. But this does not mean that the ideology itself has disappeared, and this may serve as a prop for the Democrats in the 2022 midterm election cycle, who will appeal to the “abandoned” feminist sentiment in the electorate.

The overturning of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court is welcomed by pro-life and constitutionalists alike, but its political ramifications remain to be seen. Let us hope that they will not diminish the rout that the Democrats have done everything in their power to condignly expect in the 2022 midterm elections. Only time will tell…