Connect with us

#NNPA BlackPress

OP-ED: Overturning Roe v. Wade Weakens Our Union

NNPA NEWSWIRE — Those seeking to deny basic rights rarely stop halfway. States are already proposing to legally sanction trips to other states for abortions. The enactment of these laws—which I believe to be blatantly unconstitutional, but do not trust the current Supreme Court to agree—would force women to choose between living in certain states and access to legal abortion anywhere. Given that nearly one in four American women have an abortion in their lifetimes, I fear deaths and horrific outcomes to many pregnancies and maybe another Great Migration.
The post OP-ED: Overturning Roe v. Wade Weakens Our Union appeared first on BlackPressUSA.

Published

on

By The Honorable James E. Clyburn (D-SC), House Majority Whip

The statement of purpose in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution says, “in order to create a more perfect Union.” While I often focus on the words “more perfect,” equally important is the word “Union.” I fear that the Supreme Court’s recent opinion overturning Roe v. Wade is a step back from that pursuit and significantly weakens our Union.

Ill-advised Supreme Court decisions have torn our Union asunder in the past. And anything that has happened before can happen again. The Supreme Court’s decisions in Citizens United and Shelby County started the most recent erosion of our constitutional rights and democratic values, and its decision in the Dobbs case strips away another long-held right. The Court is reverting to a dark chapter in its history and risks thrusting our Union down another dark path.

During the Reconstruction era immediately after the Civil War, our Union made significant progress toward greater perfection through the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, and congressional action to enforce their protections. These efforts granted more Americans a greater ability, as the Supreme Court observed with respect to abortion rights more than a century later in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, “to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation.”

Yet the Supreme Court of that time issued decisions that contributed to halting this progress in its tracks, and which aided and abetted the return to power of Confederates and their white supremacist governing ideology—and the ultimate rise of the Jim Crow era. In the Slaughterhouse Cases and Bradwell v. Illinois in 1873, the Court severely limited the privileges and immunities clause of the 14th Amendment, stripping this constitutional source of rights from those Americans whose privileges and immunities were under threat. In United States v. Cruikshank in 1876, the Court exonerated members of a white supremacist mob that had perpetrated a local insurrection, holding that Congress could not protect Americans against violations of their constitutional rights by non-government actors, no matter how organized or how violent.

The Court’s endorsement of white supremacy was sealed with Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, upholding the establishment of second-class citizenship with its “separate but equal” holding. The Court followed with Giles v. Harris in 1903, upholding Jim Crow voter suppression schemes that were disenfranchising African American voters throughout the South, rendering the 15th Amendment a dead letter for more than 60 years.

The effects of these decisions were that the rights of African Americans—the right to vote, the right to equal education, the right to be protected by law from deadly violence, the rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”—were dependent upon the states in which they lived. This states’ rights approach was highly detrimental to our Union and lethal to thousands of Blacks and other minorities.

Under this oppressive reality, the Great Migration ensued, where millions of African Americans moved north searching for dignity and greater opportunity. For them, a country in which they had to migrate from one part to another for basic rights—though circumstances at their destinations were far from perfect—was no union at all.

This type of disunion is beginning to repeat itself. Already, the Supreme Court’s decisions over the past decade in Shelby County (which resulted in states and localities no longer needing to have voting law changes “precleared” by the Justice Department), Rucho (which gave a green light to partisan gerrymandering), and Brnovich (which increased the difficulty of protecting the right to vote under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act) are enabling stark divergences in democratic procedures from state to state, with some states enacting significant barriers to electoral participation and accountability.

This creeping disunion is being exacerbated with the overturing of abortion rights in many states. As a result of the Supreme Court’s green lighting of voter suppression and partisan gerrymandering, this backsliding may not be limited to states where a majority of voters support candidates who favor abortion bans. When this happens, women in many states—disproportionately Southern states—will be forced to travel elsewhere for abortion care. That will be a grave imperfection in our Union. And this option may not even be feasible for many low-income women, and they will find themselves in wrenching situations with no good options.

Those seeking to deny basic rights rarely stop halfway. States are already proposing to legally sanction trips to other states for abortions. The enactment of these laws—which I believe to be blatantly unconstitutional, but do not trust the current Supreme Court to agree—would force women to choose between living in certain states and access to legal abortion anywhere. Given that nearly one in four American women have an abortion in their lifetimes, I fear deaths and horrific outcomes to many pregnancies and maybe another Great Migration.

There is no reason to believe the anti-choice zealots would stop there. Members of Congress are already discussing a national ban on abortion. The most extreme seek a constitutional ban. Some may say they don’t foresee these bans happening, and they may be right. But I don’t trust the right-wing, anti-abortion extremists to stop until the right to legal abortion has been eliminated.

And as Justice Thomas’s concurring opinion warned, those seeking to outlaw abortion won’t stop there. The Republican platform calls for overturning Obergefell, which guarantees the right of same-sex couples to marry. Other rights like contraception, intimate activity between consenting adults, and even interracial marriage could also be at risk. If this Republican Party is given the power to pass laws and appoint judges, rights that many thought were safe will be in jeopardy.

Forming a more perfect Union in a diverse society like ours cannot be achieved through mandated conformity—that is a recipe for rupture, not cohesion. I have often observed that none of us is any more or any less than our experiences allow us to be. Some Americans’ experiences have led them to the conclusion that abortion is morally acceptable, while the experiences of others have led them to the opposite conclusion.

The best way to form a more perfect Union is to leave decisions regarding abortions to those who are by far the best suited to make them: pregnant women. The Court’s decision in Dobbs will go down in history with the Slaughterhouse Cases, Bradwell, Cruikshank, Plessy, and Giles as grave errors that took us further away from a more perfect Union. I urge my congressional colleagues and state legislators to learn from our history and change course before our nation is torn apart once again.

The post OP-ED: Overturning Roe v. Wade Weakens Our Union appeared first on BlackPressUSA.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#NNPA BlackPress

Federal Raids Target Migrant Kids, Split Families

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — The Trump administration has reportedly removed at least 500 migrant children from their homes across the United States and placed them into government custody, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.

Published

on

By Stacy M. Brown
Black Press USA Senior National Correspondent

The Trump administration has reportedly removed at least 500 migrant children from their homes across the United States and placed them into government custody, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter. The children, many of whom were living with family members or other vetted sponsors, were taken during so-called “welfare checks” carried out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal agencies. According to CNN, the operations are part of a larger campaign launched shortly after President Donald Trump returned to office, with federal authorities setting up a “war room” inside the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to review data on children who entered the country alone and were later released to sponsors. Officials have used the room to coordinate efforts between agencies, including ICE and the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), which oversees the custody of unaccompanied migrant children.

Trump officials claim the effort is aimed at protecting children placed in unsafe conditions or with unqualified sponsors, pointing to cases where children were released to individuals with criminal backgrounds or those involved in smuggling. Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said the welfare checks have led to the arrests of some sponsors and the transfer of children into ORR custody. Federal data shows more than 2,500 children are currently in ORR custody. CNN reported that the average stay has grown significantly, from 67 days in December 2024 to 170 days by April 2025. Former Health and Human Services officials say new vetting rules—including income requirements, government-issued ID, and DNA tests—have made it far more difficult for parents and guardians, particularly those who are undocumented, to reclaim their children.

In some cases, reunifications that had already been scheduled were canceled. A recent lawsuit details how two brothers, ages 7 and 14, remain in government care because their mother cannot meet new documentation requirements under the revised policies. Mark Greenberg, a former senior HHS official, stated that the approach puts children in a difficult situation. “To the extent, the goal is to determine whether children are in danger or in need of help, this isn’t a good way to do that because it creates fear that anything they say could be used against their parent or family member,” he said. Immigration enforcement agents reportedly have visited children’s homes and asked about their journey to the U.S., school attendance, and upcoming immigration court appearances. Legal advocates say these visits, which sometimes include the FBI, are not standard child welfare procedures and can create fear and confusion among minors.

An FBI spokesperson confirmed the agency’s role, saying, “Protecting children is a critical mission for the FBI, and we will continue to work with our federal, state, and local partners to secure their safety and well-being.” Multiple outlets noted that the Trump administration has not provided clear evidence that large numbers of children are missing. Instead, it has referenced a Department of Homeland Security inspector general report from 2023 that noted more than 291,000 unaccompanied minors had not received notices to appear in immigration court. Former officials note that these figures do not necessarily indicate that the children are missing; some lacked updated addresses or were affected by administrative backlogs.

Within HHS, officials were instructed to expedite policy changes. Former ORR Ombudsman Mary Giovagnoli stated that a senior ICE official, Melissa Harper, was temporarily appointed to lead ORR. Her short tenure was followed by Angie Salazar, another former ICE official who now frequently communicates with White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller. Trump’s team argues the Biden administration allowed thousands of unaccompanied children to enter the country without sufficient oversight. Jen Smyers, a former ORR deputy director, stated that all sponsors underwent thorough vetting, including Department of Justice background checks and reviews of the sex offender registry. “No amount of vetting is a predictor of the future,” she said. The Miami Herald recently reported that a 17-year-old foster child in Florida was removed from his home in shackles and transferred to ICE custody. The boy and his mother had crossed the border without documentation, but he had been living in a state-supervised foster placement. The case raised concerns about the state’s cooperation with federal enforcement and the message it sends to immigrant families. Concerns about federal custody of vulnerable children are not confined to immigration.

In North Carolina, a 7-month-old baby died after being left in a hot minivan by her foster mother, who now faces charges of negligent child abuse and involuntary manslaughter. In Hawaii, dozens of children have been forced to sleep in government offices and hotels due to a shortage of foster placements. In North Dakota, a foster couple has been charged in the death of a 3-year-old after surveillance footage showed the child being repeatedly assaulted. “These cases show what happens when systems meant to protect children fail them,” said Laura Nally, director of the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights Children’s Program. “There’s a growing concern that these welfare checks are being used to carry out mass detentions of sponsors and unnecessarily return children to government custody.”

Continue Reading

#NNPA BlackPress

Protests of a Costly and Historic Parade

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — President Trump is planning an elaborate and costly celebration for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army that coincides with his birthday.

Published

on

By April Ryan

It will rain on President Trump‘s parade on Saturday if most weather forecasts correctly predict the chance of storms. President Trump is planning an elaborate and costly celebration for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army that coincides with his birthday. When asked if he plans to attend the massive D.C. celebration, New York Democratic Congressman Greg Meeks exclaimed,” Heck no!” He elaborated, saying, “It is clear to me that what Donald J. Trump is trying to do is to emulate Vladimir Putin.” Trump and Putin, the Russian president, are friends. Meeks feels “that’s where he initially got the idea from when he saw the tanks going down the street and how people bow down to Vladimir Putin, how…that authoritarian runs his country where no one questions what he does.”

Meanwhile, around the nation 1600 protests are scheduled to coincide with what is happening in Washington, D.C. Democratic Congressman Al Greene confirms he will attend several “No King Day” protest rallies and marches in his home state of Texas. The congressman questions the president’s comments about using “force” for anyone trying to stop the parade. Reverand William Barber plans to be in Philadelphia on Saturday. “We are having a rally bringing people together,” the civil rights leader confirmed. The leader of Repairers of the Breach added, “Those rallies are gonna be massive and multiracial of every race, color, creed, religion, geographic area, so this is not a moment. We must have a constant movement.”

Weeks ago, DC Mayor Muriel Bowser warned the parade, and all its military might, and pageantry would cost “many millions of dollars” just to repair District streets after the heavy artillery tanks rolled down the historic roads in the nation’s capital. Tall gates and other barricades around the White House are part of the parade’s security measures. The Secret Service has warned of a high-security presence in the area for the parade. You can expect to see military tanks, dozens of other military vehicles, and thousands of service members marching along a route stretching nearly four miles from the Pentagon to the White House.

Continue Reading

#NNPA BlackPress

Critics Question 2024 Results as Musk Tactics Surface

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — Now, a Wisconsin nonprofit has filed a legal complaint accusing Musk, his America PAC, and a Musk-affiliated group called United States of America Inc. of violating state election laws by bribing voters.

Published

on

By Stacy M. Brown
Black Press USA Senior National Correspondent

Donald Trump’s return to the White House in 2024 has reignited questions about election integrity, particularly after his remarks thanking Elon Musk for what he called a “landslide” win in Pennsylvania. “He knows those computers better than anybody… all those vote-counting computers,” Trump said. “So, thank you to Elon.” The comment set off alarm, including Texas Rep. Jasmine Crockett. “So, Trump is rambling on about he and Elon rigging the election?! Am I missing something or is he confessing to yet another damn crime?!” she posted on social media.

Now, a Wisconsin nonprofit has filed a legal complaint accusing Musk, his America PAC, and a Musk-affiliated group called United States of America Inc. of violating state election laws by bribing voters. The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign and two voters allege Musk handed out $1 million checks and that his PAC paid $100 to registered voters who signed petitions and gave their contact information. Wisconsin law prohibits offering anything of value over $1 to encourage someone to vote. The complaint also cites violations of the state’s lottery ban. The plaintiffs are asking a court to declare the actions illegal, prevent future violations, and award damages if applicable.

The lawsuit follows a failed attempt by Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul to block Musk’s actions earlier this year. Kaul argued that Musk’s conduct amounted to illegal inducement, but courts declined to intervene before the April state Supreme Court election. Jeff Mandell, president and general counsel for Law Forward, which represents the plaintiffs, said this new case is being filed under more typical legal timelines. “We’re trying to create … accountability in a more regular timeline, in a way that gives the courts the opportunity to look at this more carefully,” Mandell said.

Musk, who served briefly as a Trump adviser and led a short-lived federal agency focused on cost-cutting, has denied wrongdoing. He initially promoted the giveaways as rewards for early voters but later revised eligibility criteria following legal scrutiny. The controversy has added fuel to growing concerns over anomalies in places like Rockland County, New York, where Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly received virtually no votes despite Democratic victories in other races. “We know exactly what happened and how it unfolded, and we’re asking the court to say this is not acceptable,” Mandel has said.

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.