"contemplari et contemplata aliis tradere" ("to contemplate and pass on the contemplated things to others") —Dominican motto; cf. S.T. III q. 40 a. 1 ad 2

Main Menu

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health oral arguments

Started by Geremia, December 02, 2021, 06:24:37 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Quote Oral Argument - Audio
 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health
 Docket Number:  19-1392
 Date Argued: 12/01/21
 Play Audio:       
 Media Formats:
MP3  MP3
PDF Transcript (PDF)
Sotomayor seemed to be the only Ginsburg-incarnate. Even Kagan wasn't as liberal. And the tone of liberal-leaning Breyer seemed indignant.

Kavanaugh was the best: "why should this Court be the arbiter rather than Congress, the state legislatures, state supreme courts, the people being able to resolve this?" Kavanaugh also alluded to the principle of double-effect.

There's agreement among the justices that the court should not do anything that appears political (Roe was a case of the court legislating; Roe is not "the law of the land"; the SCOTUS is only meant to interpret the law).

Obergefell v. Hodges was mentioned a few times; the respondents' Rikelman worried overturning Roe will also lead to overturning Obergefell, because neither the right to abortion nor that to same-sex "marriage" is found in the Constitution.

In Rikelman's responses to Alito, Thomas, and Roberts; she made it very clear that the respondents are arguing for abortion rights. They even realized contraception is not 100% effective at preventing pregnancy, thus they argue abortion is required for mothers' autonomy and self-determination.

Barrett, among a few of the other justices, pointed out the arbitrariness of the viability standard.

Thomas, arguing for states' rights, brought up a case from South Carolina involving criminal child neglect by cocaine use of a pregnant lady of a post-viability child (Whitner v. State). Thomas asked: "If she had ingested cocaine pre-viability and had the same negative consequences to her child, do you think the state had an interest in enforcing that law against her?" Rikelman was forced to respond: "The state can certainly regulate to serve its interests in fetal life and in women's health."

The pro-aborts are terrified, Deo gratias. They have a larger burden of proof: to argue for a different stare decisis standard in the case of Roe and that there's a constitutional right to abortion.

I'm surprised the U.S. Constitution's posterity clause wasn't mentioned:
QuoteWe the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The State has an interest in the unborn.

cf. SCOTUSblog's "Majority of court appears poised to roll back abortion rights"



Analysis by Randall Terry, multi-decade pro-lifer (he was at the SCOTUS in '92 for the Casey decision) and founder of Operation Rescue:


Also, the judicial power is (or should be) a separate branch of government from the executive:
Integralism ch. 5, § "Division of temporal authority":
Quote65 This tripartite division is often attributed to Baron de Montesquieu (1689-1755). In fact it is equivalently found in Aristotle's Politics IV. 14: "There are, then, three parts in all constitutions (εστι δη τρία μόρια τών πολιτειών πασών). [...] Of these three, one is that which deliberates about common matters (το βουλευόμενον περί τών κοινών); the second concerns the offices (δεύτερον δε το περί τάς άρχάς), what they should be and over what matters they should have authority, and what the manner of choosing them must be; the third is the judiciary (τρίτον δέ τί το δικάζον)." This passage states in effect that a constitution (this appears to be the best translation on this occasion of πολιτεία) must provide for a legislature, a functioning executive and a judicial power.

66 A. Ottaviani defines it [legislative power] as the 'right of determining in an obligatory manner the things which are necessary and useful for attaining the end of the society' [ius proponendi obligatorio iodo quae necessaria et utilia sunt ad finem societatis assequendum]; Compendium Iuris Publici Ecclesiastici, 4th edition (Rome: Vatican Press, 1954), 43 [PDF p. 25].

67 A. Ottaviani defines it [judicial power] as 'the right of declaring and proposing in an obligatory manner which concrete acts of subjects are conformed or contrary to right, and the legitimate effects of this conformity or contrariety' [ius declarandi seu proponendi modo obligatorio, quænam subditorum actiones in concreto sint iuri conformes, quaeque eidem difformes, et effectus legitimos eiusdem, conformitatis aut difformitatis]; Compendium, 49 [PDF p. 28].

68 Or as the [executive power] "right of enforcing the application of laws and sentences, of directing persons or of disposing of things, and of removing all obstacles which impede the full possession of the social end" [ius urgendi legum sententiarum que applications, dirigendo personas vel disponendi de rebus, atque removendo ommia obstacula quæ finis socialis plenam, assecutionem impediunt]; ibid., 61. The executive power itself may be divided into a power of governance, in regard to persons, and of administration, in regard to things. The power of coercion, which is sometimes mentioned as a third part of the executive power, is therefore rather an aspect of the power of governance.
Christ the King has all three of these powers: Pius XI, Quas primas §14


Court has voted to overturn Roe, according to draft opinion:

leaked SCOTUS initial Dobbs v. Jackson opinion, Justice Alito circulated (10 Feb. 2022):

Alito's intro. (pp. 1-6) gives a good overview of Roe v. Wade, its arbitrary trimester scheme, and flaky justification.
p. 2:
Quote[Roe's] survey of history ranged from the constitutionally irrelevant (e.g., its discussion of abortion in antiquity) to the plainly incorrect (e.g., its assertion that abortion was probably never a crime under the common law).
cf. Hilger's The Fake and Deceptive Science Behind Roe v. Wade: Settled Law v. Settled Science
Planned Parenthood v. Casey's scrapping Roe's trimester scheme (p. 4):
QuoteCasey threw out Roe's trimester scheme and substituted a new rule of uncertain origin under which States were forbidden to adopt any regulation that imposed an "undue burden" on a woman's right to have an abortion.
pp. 68-91: Appendix A:
QuoteThis appendix contains statutes criminalizing abortion at all stages of pregnancy in the States existing in 1868. The statutes appear in chronological order.
pp. 92-98: Appendix B:
QuoteThis appendix contains statutes criminalizing abortion at all stages in each of the territories that became States and in the District of Columbia. The statutes appear in chronological order of enactment.


Caitlin Myers, Rachel Jones, and Ushma Upadhyay, "Predicted Changes in Abortion Access and Incidence in a Post-Roe World," Contraception 100, no. 5 (November 1, 2019): 367–73

Fig. 1. Travel distances from county population centroids to the nearest publicly-identifiable abortion facility in the ANSIRH database.
Fig. 2. Predicted travel distances from county population centroids to the nearest remaining abortion facility in the ANSIRH database under two post-Roe policy scenarios. Panel A, Travel distances if trigger bans take effect. Panel B, Travel distances if all high-risk [very pro-life] states ban abortion.
Fig. 3. Predicted changes in abortions due to changes in travel distances in two post-Roe policy scenarios. Panel A, Predicted changes in abortion rates if trigger bans take effect. Panel B, Predicted changes in abortion rates if abortion becomes illegal in high-risk [very pro-life] states.


Abp. Viganò: Roe v. Wade leak was Deep State 'propaganda operation' to 'radicalize' abortion debate, influence justices

Thu May 12, 2022 - 5:45 pm EDT

(LifeSiteNews) – In recent days, the media has leaked the news that, according to a draft obtained from the Supreme Court of the United States, the justices of the Court are about to declare that the Roe v. Wade decision of January 22, 1973, is unconstitutional and must be overruled.

First of all, a widespread misunderstanding needs to be clarified: this potential decision of the Supreme Court does not address the moral legitimacy of abortion, but rather whether the 1973 decision conforms to the Constitution of the United States with respect to the sovereignty of the individual states. It is not therefore addressing an ethical or moral question with regard to the legitimacy of abortion, but rather a question of jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under the Constitution.

The vulnus [wound] that the Roe v. Wade decision inflicted on the sovereignty of the states of the Union is a constitutional matter, and the justices will have to make a ruling on it as such.

It is significant that this aspect of the decision has been deliberately not spoken about by the media, emphasizing instead the specific content of the decision and making it an ideological banner. It is also clear that this propaganda operation, maliciously conducted by the Deep State, has the purpose of radicalizing the debate that the news will stir up in public opinion, with the intention of influencing the motivations of the decision, which has yet to be finalized by the justices. It does not escape anyone's notice that the premature leak of the draft of the decision has provoked violent protest demonstrations organized by pro-abortion groups and Antifa, while at the same time scandalous provocations and sacrilegious attacks on Catholic churches during services are multiplying. The courageous witness of the Catholic laity ought to be encouraged and supported by the Shepherds of the Church, precisely in the name of that freedom of worship and preaching that is an inalienable right of the Church of Christ, as well as an inalienable constitutional right of all Americans under the First Amendment.

Thus, while Americans have yet to fully comprehend the scandals that are emerging about the criminal management of the pseudo-pandemic and the imposition of an experimental treatment that irreversibly modifies the human genome with still unknown long-term damage and serious side effects that have been culpably concealed by pharmaceutical multinationals and control agencies; while Special Counsel John Durham is preparing to conclude the investigation into Russiagate which will soon see Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Biden – whose accomplices include members of the highest levels of the Italian government at the time – investigated for their role in the suppression of Trump's presidential campaign (and hopefully condemned for high treason and attacking the institutions of government); while Joe Biden desperately seeks to cover up the cases of corruption involving his son Hunter in Ukraine, which disturbingly include his involvement in the biolaboratories located there in which research on the "gain of function" was carried out on the SARS-CoV-2 virus, altering its pathogenesis and its transmissibility; while the White House desperately seeks to blame the problems in the U.S. economy of inflation and the rising price of raw materials on the Russian-Ukrainian crisis; while NATO acts as an arms salesman in the service of the American lobby and tries to impede the peace negotiations between Putin and Zelensky at all costs – behold, the operation is ready with which to distract public opinion and radicalize the clash between pro-life and "pro-choice," after having successfully experimented with the same method of mass manipulation during the pandemic farce and even earlier with the George Floyd case and the exasperation provoked by the "Black Lives Matter" movement.

 If the Supreme Court is to be reproached for anything, it is for having wanted to impose legalized abortion on the states of the Union in 1973, even where it was rightly prohibited: this abuse of power was tolerated because it was cloaked in the ideological prejudice of the Democratic Party that gave rise to a massacre of the innocents that cries out to Heaven for justice. The Roe v. Wade decision was an operation of deliberate partiality that violated not only the natural law and the law of God but also the very principles enshrined in the United States Constitution. If the justices are to heal this vulnus, they will limit themselves to applying the law that they have sworn to defend, something which their predecessors fifty years ago either did not know how to do or did not wish to.

And if it is true that on May 11 the United States Senate demonstrated that it is not aligned with the proponents of abortion (by its vote to block the "Women's Health Protection Act"), one cannot fail to notice the scandal given by self-styled "Catholic" politicians, first of all Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, who trample down without scruples the morality that instead they ought to commit themselves to defending in the social and legislative sphere.

The Holy See and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops ought to reaffirm, along with a firm condemnation of abortion, that American Catholics cannot and must not vote for elected representatives whose positions are not consistent with the Magisterium of the Church, and who as such are excommunicated. The embarrassing silence of the Hierarchy reveals itself as a confirmation of the sense of inferiority of those who ought to be wisely leading the people entrusted to their care, who instead are following them off the edge of a cliff along with the politicians whom the bishops supported in the last electoral campaign. Hearing Joe Biden advocate for abortion as a "fundamental right" – disguised under the hypocritical euphemism of "women's health protection" – proves the loss of any sense of the meaning of Catholic social commitment, for which not only the Hierarchy is responsible but also the entire system of Catholic education that looks to it for guidance. What sort of teaching is being given in Catholic high schools and universities if their graduates can declare that they support abortion without understanding its moral gravity? How can it be said that the killing of an innocent creature can be decided by the very mother who instead ought to protect the life of her child more than her own? Is this the "civilization" that Americans want to support and propagate? Are these the values that they want to pass on to future generations?

I am certain that Americans will not allow themselves either to be sidetracked by these operations of mass distraction or to be provoked by the pro-abortion protests that have been deliberately incited in order to foment clashes and violent reactions. Let us not forget that those who propagandize the killing of children are equally supportive of euthanasia, LGBTQ ideology, gender theory, the Great Reset, the pandemic farce, and the use of the Russian-Ukrainian crisis to weaken the nations of Europe and cover up the crimes of the Deep State.

Let us pray therefore that She whom we venerate as Sede Sapientiæ, the Seat of Wisdom, may illumine the minds of the justices of the Supreme Court and inspire them with a sense of justice so that they may recognize the sacredness and inviolability of the life of the unborn child. And may the Woman foretold in Genesis crush the head of the Serpent who is the first inspirer of the horrendous crime of abortion.

May 12, 2022

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop


QuoteWhy Letters? Supreme Court judges prefer typed or hand-written letters over emails and phone calls. Security professionals and law clerks sort the incoming mail first. Exceptional individual letters are given directly to the addressed judges. Others are noted.
Who are the current U.S. Supreme Court Judges? 
  • Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.
  • Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
  • Associate Justice Stephen G. Breyer* Announced Retirement
  • Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor
  • Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh
  • Associate Justice Elena Kagan
  • Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch
  • Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett
  • Associate Justice Clarence Thomas
How do I address my Envelope?
  • For the Chief Justice, address your envelope to: The Chief Justice of the United States, One First Street N.E., Washington, D.C., 20543
  • To address a letter to any other Supreme Court justice, address the envelope to: Justice (surname), The Supreme Court of the United States, One First Street N.E., Washington, D.C., 20543
What Is the general format for a letter to the Supreme Court?                                 
Your address
Street, City, State Zip
Date mm/dd/yyyy
The Honorable _______  ________
Supreme Court of the United States
1 First Street, NE
Washington. DC 20543
Dear Chief Justice Roberts,
Dear Justice _________ (surname),
Content of Letter – Theme: The Humanity of the Unborn Child; Like Slavery, the Court's Duty is to Outlaw, Not Regulate, the Killing of An Unborn Child; Remember the human embryo: "A person's a person no matter how small," courtesy of Dr. Seuss (1954). Words are weapons. Use clear and precise language. Lastly, be respectful of the office.
Closing salutation – e.g., Sincerely, Thank you,         
Your Signature       
Should a sample copy of the letter be sent to the Public Information Officer? Yes, where possible, making a total of ten letters [9 justices + media liaison].

Content of my letter:
QuoteThe preamble of United States Constitution1 protects born and unborn human life:
QuoteWe the People of the United States [...] secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves [born] and our Posterity [unborn.]
Justice is the most excellent of moral virtues; "in things touching man, the chief of all is life, on which all other things depend."2

🎩 tip:


Randall Terry is probably the only prominent pro-lifer present at the Webster (1989), Casey v. Planned Parenthood (1992), and Dobbs (2022) decisions.


Quote from: Geremia on May 18, 2022, 02:13:58 PMThe preamble of United States Constitution1 protects born and unborn human life:
QuoteWe the People of the United States [...] secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves [born] and our Posterity [unborn.]
cited in Justice Clarence Thomas's confirmation hearings.


Quote from: Randall A. TerryDivine Judgment has Begun.
What are Our "Fruits of Repentance?"
Randall A. Terry (Permission granted to reprint)
Scripture teaches that there are "sins that cry to God for vengeance." Theologians refer to these as "social sins," "structures of sin," "the perversion of justice," where "institutions" - including government - codify, defend, and promote the sins crying for vengeance.
These sins include the shedding of innocent blood, the sins of Sodom, and now, telling children that they can mutilate themselves chemically or surgically and thereby change the gender God gave them. (See Gen 4:10; 18:20-21; 19:13; Ex 3:7-9; 22:22-24; James 5:1-6.)
America has embraced, codified, glorified, and defended evils that bring God's judgment.
The judgments God uses to chasten nations are delineated in detail throughout Scripture. They include (but aren't limited to) drought, plagues, fear, economic loss, violence, war, and political tyranny. (See Lev 26 and Duet 28.)
God is not mocked. What a nation sows, it shall reap. The U.S. has earned Divine judgment.
What can we do to avert His judgment? God said: "At one moment I may declare concerning a nation or a kingdom, that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, but if that nation, concerning which I have spoken, turns from its evil, I will change my mind about the disaster that I intended to bring on it." (Jer. 18:7,8)
To mitigate God's chastening hand and to help restore our nation God's people must bring forth "fruits of repentance;" fruit that is spiritual, physical, and governmental.
The Spiritual Fruits of Repentance
"Hardness of heart" is rampant. Most Christians  have lived alongside child killing and sɛҳuąƖ sins and for so long, we've grown calloused and indifferent; we're no longer scandalized.
Before the destruction of Judah, God told Ezekiel that he would spare those "who sigh and groan" over the abominations that were committed in Jerusalem:
"And the Lord said to him, 'Go through the city, through Jerusalem, and put a mark upon the foreheads of the men who sigh and groan over all the abominations that are committed in it.' And to the others He said in my hearing, 'Pass through the city after him, and smite; your eye shall not spare, and you shall show no pity; slay old men outright, young men and maidens, little children and women, but touch no one upon whom is the mark.'" (Ezekiel 9:4–6)
God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, but saved Lot was because his soul was tormented. Evildoers became "an example to those who afterward would live ungodly; and delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds)." (2 Peter 2:6–9)
Christians must ask God's mercy, and confess: "We have not sighed, grieved, and groaned over these abominations. We have not been tormented as Lot was."
The Prophet Daniel provides an example of confessing sins that brought judgment, and begging God' mercy. This prayer came at the end of the 70-year Babylonian captivity, prior to the Jєωs being restored to Judah, at which time they rebuilt Jerusalem, and Solomon's Temple:
"And I prayed to the Lord my God, and made confession, and said, 'O Lord, great and awesome God, who keeps His covenant and mercy with those who love Him, and with those who keep His commandments, we have sinned and committed iniquity, we have done wickedly and rebelled, even by departing from Your precepts and Your judgments. Neither have we heeded Your servants the prophets, who spoke in Your name to our kings and our princes, to our fathers and all the people of the land. ...As it is written in the Law of Moses, all this disaster has come upon us...we have sinned, we have done wickedly!...O Lord, forgive! O Lord, listen and act!'" (See Daniel 9:3–19)
If the U.S. is to be restored, confession must be made regarding our indifference to sins that cry for vengeance; shedding innocent blood, "same sex marriage," transgenderism, and more.
With repentance prayers usually comes the duty to change. Repentance means to turn, to have sorrow and regret, a change of mind and deeds. Other definitions of repentance include "making amends," "making restitution," "changing your ways," and "reparation."
The Physical Fruits of Repentance
Part of repentance  -  the reparation for the damage done - is to do what we can to save babies from murder and to work to make it a crime to kill babies in the womb.
Millions of babies have been killed, and women marred for life, while Christians did little or nothing. The death of a child was faced with indifference: "It's not my problem," or worse, "I'll support you in whatever decision you make."
If a mass murderer were hovering with a sword over a child's head, deciding if the child lives or dies, is the right response to say to the killer "I'll support you in whatever decision you make"?
Christians must ask: "What would I want someone to do if I were about to be murdered?"
Christians are called to "rescue strangers;" by taking any number of actions. I.e. go to abortuaries and speak up for babies; hold a sign, or begging a girl at Church to not to kill her baby – offering to adopt the baby. "Love your neighbor as yourself" means doing for your neighbor what you would want done for you.
For Christians with health issues, repentance is more limited. Exceptions aside, all of us have the ability to speak against child killing – at least in the "public square" of the Internet.
Speaking out is critical, but we can do more: "Little children, let us love, not in word or speech, but in truth and action." (I John 3:18)
As Isaiah said, "This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me." Most Christians would say, "I'm against abortion," or "I'm pro-life." But the proof of genuine repentance is in deeds or lack of deeds.
Legal and Political Fruits of Repentance
Perhaps the arena where repentance is most needed to stop the sins that cry to the heavens, are the legal and political realms.
The final "fruit of repentance" is that it is a crime again to kill a baby in the womb. Child killing must be outlawed; if the laws are not changed, judgment will continue to grow worse.
In Leviticus 20, God demanded that the Israelites punish a man who slaughtered his children for the god Molech:
"Any man of the people of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel, who gives any of his children to Molech shall be put to death; the people of the land shall stone him with stones." (Leviticus 20:2)
If the Israelites did not enforce the law, God said He would bring judgment on those who killed their children and those who did not stop them: "And if the people of the land do at all hide their eyes from that man, when he gives one of his children to Molech, and do not put him to death, then I will set My face against that man and against his family, and will cut them off from among their people, him and all who follow him in playing the harlot after Molech." (20:4–5)
The Law as a Deterrent
One of the main purposes of law is to deter criminal deeds (such as murdering babies) using the fear of punishment. St. Paul wrote:
"For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute His wrath on the wrongdoer." (Rom. 13:3–4)
"If you do wrong, be afraid." One of the main purposes God established criminal laws  is to deter criminal acts through the fear of punishment. Some people will obey the law simply because they are afraid of the consequences if they break the law.
The inverse is true: if a criminal fears no punishment, they have nothing to deter them.
Look at cities in America that don't prosecute the crime of theft. Entire stores have been ravaged, and forced to close, because so much was stolen, and no one was prosecuted.
Some people make the false argument: "If abortion is illegal, people are going to do it anyway." That is true. We have laws against assault, murder, and rape, yet those crimes are committed every day. But can you imagine how many more of these crimes would happen if they were not against the law?
The number of babies killed in the womb will drop by 90% if abortion is illegal. AND, we will not be betraying innocent blood in our laws.
Did We Give Them the Power to Kill?
Laws in America are made by "lawmakers," "members of congress," etc., elected by voters. Those in power are kept there by voters.
Tragically: Christian voters keep the killing of unborn babies legal. Without their vote, those who promote murder could not stay in power.
Over 50 percent of Roman Catholics voted for candidates that actively promote the murder of children in the last five general elections. Likewise, over one-third of evangelicals voted for those who promote the murder of babies.
Isaiah said: your hands are full of blood...
cease to do evil, learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; defend the fatherless... (Isaiah 1:15–17)
If Christians repented of voting for child killers, the child killers would be swept from power; the legalized killing of babies would grind to a halt. The fact is: the hands of Christian voters are stained with the blood of innocent babies.
Consider this illustration: If someone asks for a ride and tells the driver, "I need to get food for my sick neighbor, then go to the pharmacy to pick up a prescription for my mother, then drop off some items at Salvation Army for the poor. Then I need to go to the bank, where I will rob the bank and shoot the bank employees."
If the driver takes them, the driver is culpable before God and a criminal court because he knew the intent of the person seeking the ride.
It would do no good to tell the judge, "I didn't agree with robbery and murder! I gave him a ride because of the good things he was doing." The driver would be an accessory to murder.
When a Christian votes for someone who promotes murder, same-gender marriage, or transgenderism, they are "giving a ride" to get a politician to power, and they share in the guilt of what that politician does when he gets there.
This is how the sins of Christian voters have led to the murder of millions of babies, the desecration of marriage, and the legitimization of "transgenderism." And this is where the fruits of repentance are most keenly needed.
ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ "Marriage" Made "Legal;" Child Killing; The Fruit of our Votes
For multiple generations in America, the most perverse and evil changes in law were "handed down" by a godless Supreme Court majority.
Slavery as a "right"; a flood of pornography; prayer, Scripture reading, and the display of the Ten Commandments being outlawed in public schools and buildings; child killing by abortion; so-called "ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ marriage"— all these were forced on America by the Supreme Court, like a revolution, without a shot being fired
So, when a Christian votes, they must know the agenda of the candidate. They must vote knowing what kind of federal judges a President will nominate, and the Senate will confirm. And the priority of their vote must be ending the legalized sins that cry for vengeance.
Thank God, because of three appointments to the Supreme Court made by then-President Trump, the demonic decision Roe vs. Wade was finally overturned.
But... the battle to end the killing in America is nowhere near complete. Whether protection for babies is had in all fifty states depends on if Christians truly repent of voting for baby killers.
In the past, we could say "child-killing was forced upon America by the Court." But now, people are clamoring to kill their children. 
With Roe gone, it's terrifying to see that millions of people – including Christians – want to keep the "right" to slaughter babies in the womb. Look at what happened recently in Kansas.
The hour is long past for Christian leaders and Christian laymen to boldly declare: "If you vote for [name], knowing he promotes child killing, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ marriage, and the crime against children of transgenderism, you have betrayed Jesus Christ and the laws of God with your vote. We must repent of helping those who hate God with our vote, and rather, use our vote to end the "sins that cry to God for vengeance."
If the Christian community awakens from its coma, and repents of aiding the legalized "sins that cry for vengeance," perhaps the judgments of God will be mitigated in the U.S.
If not  - if Christians continue in their hardness of heart, voting for baby killers and the servants of Sodom  - the judgments forewarned in God's Law shall be poured out as seems best to Him.
Joe Biden and "Soul of the Nation:" Murder and Perversion?
In Biden's 9/1/22 speech about the "soul of the nation," he said MAGA Republicans are a threat to "freedom, the rule of law," etc. Then he said:
"MAGA forces are determined to take this country backwards — backwards to an America where there is no right to choose [murder innocent babies], no right to privacy, [transgenderism] no right to contraception [not accurate], no right to marry who you love
[ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ marriage]...they fan the flames of political violence that are a threat to our personal rights, to the pursuit of justice, to the rule of law, to the very soul of this country."
Biden's definition of "the rule of law" and "the soul of this country" (and that of Democrats and the Democrat Party Platform) is "the sins that cry for vengeance;" murder, sodomy, and telling children they can "change genders."
Psalm 106:37-42 warns what is coming:
They sacrificed their sons
    and their daughters to the demons;
they poured out innocent blood,
    the blood of their sons and daughters...
    and the land was polluted with blood.
Then the anger of the Lord was kindled against    his people, and he hated his heritage;
    He gave them into the hand of the nations,
    so that those who hated them ruled over them. Their enemies oppressed them...
As the anger of the Lord is kindled against us, and He pours out His judgments, none should be surprised. It's because Christians have aided and abetted the "sins that cry for vengeance." America will reap what she has sown...and as the Scripture says: "Judgment begins at the House of God."


U.S. Supreme Court [unanimously] Rejects Challenge From Pro-Life Doctors to Abortion Pill

Sts. Paul & John condemn φαρμακεία (pharmakeia: witchcrafts, sorceries, magic potions, etc.):
The Greek word φαρμακεία (pharmakeia) can mean
  • drug,
  • purgative,
  • emetic (substance that induces vomiting),
  • abortifacient (substance that causes an abortion),
  • potion,
  • spell,
  • poison,
  • witchcraft;
so Scripture certainly prohibits the usage of harmful drugs like those that induce abortion, potentially abortifacient contraceptives, and other deadly substances. In the following verses, the Rheims translation translates φαρμακεία as "witchcrafts" or "sorceries." St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate uses "veneficium."
QuoteGa 5:19-21: "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, immodesty, luxury, Idolatry, witchcrafts {φαρμακία}, enmities, contentions, emulations, wraths, quarrels, dissensions, sects, Envies, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like. Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God."
QuoteRv 9:21: "Neither did they penance from their murders, nor from their sorceries {φαρμάκων},* nor from their fornication, nor from their thefts."
*The New American Bible (NAB) (and NABRE) translates φαρμάκων here as "magic potions."
(source: Matt Gutting's comment)

QuoteRv 21:8: "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers {φαρμακοῖς}, and idolaters, and all liars, they shall have their portion in the pool burning with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."
Rv 22:15: "Without are dogs, and sorcerers {φαρμακοὶ}, and unchaste, and murderers, and servers of idols, and every one that loveth and maketh a lie."