Thank God!

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States Supreme Court finally issued its ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, upholding Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban, overturning Roe v. Wade, and delivering the pro-life cause its most transformative victory since Roe unleashed nationwide abortion-on-demand nearly half a century ago. 

Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the draft mischievously leaked by the pro-abortion lobby in early May, delivered the opinion of the Court, with Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett joining. 

The ruling declares Roe "egregiously wrong from the start." Wrote Justice Alito, "It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives."

This is indeed a great victory for the pro-life movement. It is also a victory for states rights, and for President Trump and all the others who fought for the return of laws made in according with the Constitution -- the fundamental law of the land -- not according to the whims of judges choosing the political correctness (read: popularity) over justice.

More than that, the Dobbs decision comes as an answer to prayer. In the 49 years since Roe v. Wade, thousands of petitions have been signed, and billions -- literally billions -- of Rosaries and other prayers have been sent to Heaven, to protect innocent unborn babies from those who would wish to kill them.

Thanks be to God, and to the Blessed Mother of God, for hearing and answering our prayers. Te Deum laudamus!

 

Pro-abort protesters descend on Justice Alito's home

The demonstrators...were a useless mob of ignorant, chicken-shit ego junkies whose only accomplishment was to embarrass the whole tradition of public protest. They were hopelessly disorganized, they had no real purpose in being there, and about half of them were so wasted on grass, wine, and downers that they couldn't say for sure [where they were].

Dr Hunter S. Thompson was writing (in Fear and Loating on the Campaign Trail `72) about leftist loonies massing in the streets of Miami Beach at the 1972 Reublican convention, not the mini-mob who gathered a couple of nights ago outside Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's house in Alexandria VA.

About 200 equally loony, but better-organized pro-abortion activists marched down the street, some using megaphones to lead the crowd in chants of  "You don't care if people die," and "My body, my choice," which sounded a bit off, since some of those yelling appeared to be men. (They could have been trans-gendered persons; you never know these days.)

This was part of a wave of public protests against a possible overturning of Roe v. Wade, the nearly 50-year-old ruling that imposed abortion on demand on all 50 states, as suggested by a leak of Justice Alito's draft of the majority opinion of the Supreme Court in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. 

Shouting out for "justice", the crowd threatened, "If we don't get it, burn it down!" and "When abortion rights are under attack, what do we do? Rise up, fight back!" The mostly peaceful protest was led by the anti-establishment group "ShutDownDC", which accused Justice Alito of wanting to "take away our rights. But our rights are fundamentally ours. We’re showing up to tell him in person."

After having demanded that SCOTUS "keep abortion safe and legal," the protesters assembled in front of Justice Alito's house to deliver prepared speeches. One speaker claimed that "forcing people to carry unwanted pregnancies will cause unnecessary death and lifelong injury, both physical and mental." Whose "unnecessary death" he was referring to wasn't made clear, but probably wasn't the innocent baby still in his mother's womb.

It wasn't only Justice Alito who was targeted. Earlier last week, the pro-abortion group Ruth Sent Us doxed the five conservative members of the Supreme Court, posting their streets on online and calling for protests. Over the weekend, protesters demonstrated outside of the private residences of Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts. Perhaps they hadn't heard that Chief Justice Roberts disagrees with the majority, and is writing the minority opinion.

Meanwhile, there is still no news of the investigation into the source of the leak of Justice Alito's draft opinion. Last week, former Attorney General Bill Barr said that the Roberts may need to appoint a special counsel to identify the culprit(s), who, he said, could be charged with obstruction of justice. 

"I think the Chief would have had the option, and perhaps he still will, to appoint a special counsel," said Mr Barr. "Not in the classical criminal sense, but the court can appoint a counsel and he could bring in a former US attorney or someone with a criminal law background. And I’m sure he would get the support he needed from the FBI or any other law enforcement agency."

Walt is available to take charge of the investigation for a nominal fee. It shouldn't take too much sleuthing, since the names of the two leading suspects are already known.

Unrest grows, at home and abroad

Walt has been quiet for the last couple of days, waiting for other shoes to drop in the Philippines, Sri Lanka, and the Excited States of America. Here's the recap. 

The presidential election in the Philippines turned out as Walt predicted. (Lifetime pct .992) Bongbong, aka Ferdinand Marcos Jr., son of the late Philippines dictator of the same name, is riding on a tsunami of votes. 

He has 30 million so far, more than double the total of his rival, the current Vice-President, Maria Leonra "Leni" Robredo. 

36 years after protesters drove his dad out of office, Bongbong will become Pinas' latest "strongman president". Ms Robredo, predicts that his election will sanctify and perpetuate the abuses of his father.

Against all such criticism, in Marcos strongholds in Bisayas (the nicest part of PI, IMHO), the historic family name holds an almost messianic appeal over impressionable and celebrity-struck people who don't know or don't believe the tales of corruption and dictatorship that marked his father's 21-year rule.

In the province of Leyte, ancestral home of his 92-year-old mother Imelda of the 1000 Shoes, the junior Marcos is seen as a man of the people, even though he's lived a life of wealth and privilege few Pinoys can imagine. Such is the power of political family names, like "Kennedy" and "Clinton" and [Next item please. Ed.]    

In another poor country which seems to be sliding from third-world status to fourth-world, Sri Lanka, mostly peaceful protests against leftist misrule have turned violent.

Walt has lost touch with his agents in Colombo and Kandy [Are you there? Send word! Ed.] but understands that a curfew is now in force across the country after mobs burned down homes belonging to the ruling Rajapaksa family and their cronies (such as government minister Sananth Nishantha, whose blazing house is shown below) amid mounting anger at the economic crisis. 

Last night's violence capped a day of unrest that saw Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa quit, but this failed to bring calm. Crowds besieged his residence, from which he was evacuated in a pre-dawn operation amid tear gas and warning shots. 

Protests are continuing despite the curfew. Seven people have died and over 200 have been injured so far this week. The island-wide curfew has been extended until Wednesday morning as authorities seek to quell the violence.

Back in the USA, although Antifa and other woke, pro-abortion terrorists have mounted "mostly peaceful protests" in such leftist strongholds as Seattle and Portland OR, their efforts to fire up the citizenry [No more puns please. Ed.] haven't held a candle [Watch it! Ed.] to those of the righteously angry demonstrators in Sri Lanka. 

Public opinion polls measuring the reaction to the leaked draft of the SCOTUS decision in the Hobbs case, suggest that the majority of Americans won't support attempts by Democrats and other liberals and leftists to codify "women's reproductive health rights", i.e. the right to kill babies if having them is inconvenient.

Meanwhile, Walt awaits news -- any news at all -- about the Marshal of the Supreme Court's supposed efforts to find and prosecute the source of the leak. Let me name names once again. Reports all over the Net identify Justice Sonia Maria Sotomayor and/or her clerk, Amit Jane, as the source of the leak. Has the Marshal interviewed either of them? We should be told!

Further reading: "The Real Threat is the Violent Left-wing", by Jeff Crouere, Townhall, 9/5/22. 

What's happening with the SCOTUS Dobbs case leak?

"Be vewy vewy quiet. We're hunting leakers!... But we don't want to embarrass a Democwat appointee."

I'm pretty sure that's what the Hon. John Roberts, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, has told the Marshal of the Court. Because nothing but the sound of crickets has been heard from the latter since the beginning of the investigation into the leak of Justice Samuel Alito's draft of the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the ruling which seems set to overturn Roe v. Wade.

As Walt told you early yesterday, the source of the leak has been traced (according to social media) to the office of Justice Sonia Maria Sotomayor, the affirmative action appointee put on the shelf [bench, shurely. Ed.] by the Prez. (You didn't think President Brandon got the idea of appointing a woman of colour all by himself, did you?)  

If Justice Sotomayor didn't give the draft to the lickspittle press in person, she carelessly left it on her desk where her very woke clerk, Amit Jain, could see it and act accordingly. That's the story circulating in the Swamp, and far beyond.

And yet, and yet... as far as Ed. can see, not a word of this has been published in any of the major media, including Breitbart News. Isn't that strange?  You'd think BN (or Fox at least) would publish the aforementioned names, just to get a reaction.

Consider this story, told by Hunter S. Thompson, Doctor of Gonzo Journalism, in Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail `72. 

Legend has it that in one of his early election campaigns, Lyndon Baines Johnson was facing stiff opposition from a prominent Texan farmer.  He asked his aides what kind dirt would stick to his opponent, and was told the man was as scandal-free as any Texan politician could be.

"He's been happily married for 30 years, doesn't mess around with other women, doesn't smoke, doesn't drink, doesn't gamble. There's nothing bad we can say about him!"

"Tell ya what," LBJ supposedly replied. "Start a rumor that he's been known to have carnal knowledge with his sows."

"What?!", shot back one of his helpers. "You want to call the guy a pig-fucker?! Nobody's gonna believe that!"

"I know," replied Mr Johnson. "But let's make the sonovabitch deny it!"

Walt wonders if the Marshal of the Supreme Court, or an investigative reporter for WaPo, or anyone else, has asked Justic Sotomayor (or her aide) if there's any truth to the very strong rumor. Let's hear them deny it!

Further reading: "Alito 5 Must Stay the Course", by Patrick J. Buchanan, LewRockwell.com, 7/5/22.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization: Who sprung the leak?

Two days ago, in "Roe v. Wade to be overturned? What happens then?", Walt told you about the virtually unprecedent leak of a draft opinion in Case No. 19-1392 in the Supreme Court of the United States, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. If confirmed, the opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito, would overrule Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision which made abortion on demand legal in the USA.

Chief Justice John Roberts said that the court's marshal has been directed to launch an investigation into the source of the leak. Walt suggested that Justice KBJ, the latest appointee to SCOTUS, be interviewed. It now appears that the leak was known as early as February, so the focus is now on an earlier diversity hire.

Justice Sonia Maria Sotomayor is an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. She was nominated by the Prez [Surprised? Ed.] and has been sitting on the SCOTUS bench since August of 2009. 

She is the third woman, first Latina and first Woman of Colour to hold the position. She is known to get her hair on fire about such liberal issues as abortion, the Dempanic, etc.

For example, Justice Sotomayor claimed in Jauary over 100,000 children are in "serious condition" with the Wuhan flu. Even WaPo was constrained to point out that while omicron does seem to affect children more than other variants of the coronavirus, the judge's figure was wrong by a factor of about 20. 

Imagine Justice Sotomayor's chagrin on learning that SCOTUS was set to take away women's "reproductive health rights" (read: rights to kill their unborn babies). According to the leaked draft, she and two other judges -- Stephen Breyer and (((Elena Kagan))) -- oppose the ruling.

Could Justice Sotomayor be the source of the leak? The ultimate source, perhaps, but not even an AAA (Affirmative Action Appointee) would risk impeachment from a cushy job which is hers for life. She would be careful to preserve deniability, and set someone else up to take the fall.

Step forward Amit Jain, Justice Sotomayor's clerk. According to a story in International Business Times, Mr Jain has been identified "on social media" as the prime leaker. He was born, raised and educated in India.  

Amit Jain was born and raised in India, and according to IBT was educated there. But according to another source, his LinkedIn account says he holds a B.A. in Political Science from Brown and a J.D. from Yale. 

While at Yale law school, Mr Jain made headlines by blasting the university for its support of the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh. He was quoted in a 2017 Politico piece by (((Josh Gerstein))), the reporter who, along with Alexander Ward, wrote the article in which the leaked draft was published.

Whereas Justice Sotomayor could be impeached, if it could be proven that she instigated or conspired in the leak, Mr Jain (if it was his doing) can merely be fired, and perhaps fined or jailed for violating his oath of confidentiality. While still at law school, he was a member of the Worker and Immigrant Rights Advocacy Clinic, the Juvenile Justice Clinic, and the Housing Clinic, so on form he should have no trouble finding another job, perhaps as a political/legal advisor to the Democratic Party.

UPDATED: Roe v. Wade to be overturned? What happens then?

Pierre Poilievre, front-run in the Conservative Party of Canada's third leadership election in six years, should be glad to be alive. As Walt told you in "The problem with Poilievre" (WWW 30/4/22), his mother was a 16-year-old, unwed, Irish-Canadian Catholic. Although Canada had allowed abortions (with restrictions and mandatory counselling first) since 1969, abortion on demand wasn't permissible until the Supreme Court of Canada decided R. v. Morgenthaler in 1988. Mr Poilievre was born in 1979.

I mention this because Breitbart News reports this morning that what purports to be a draft of an opinion in Case No. 19-1392 in the Supreme Court of the United States, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The opinion, possibly written by Justice Samuel Alioto, would overrule Roe v. Wade, which made abortion on demand legal in the USA.

If the document is genuine, leaking it would be an act of betrayal by one of the 45 people with access to such material, all of them sworn to reveal not a word of any discussions or opinions until an opinion has been signed by at least five justices. The leak of this draft would be one of the greatest scandals to ever hit America's highest court 

A key part of the possible draft reads: "It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives." It makes the case that where the Constitution is silent, the American people govern themselves through elections and elected leaders, not federal judges. 

It quotes the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who said, "The permissibility of abortion, and the limitations upon it, are to be resolved like most important questions in our democracy: by citizens trying to persuade one another and then voting.That is what the Constitution and the rule of law demand."

BN moots the possibility that draft opinion (if it is genuine) is an attempt to intimidate one or more justices to reverse their vote, or to ignite a liberal brushfire to pack the Supreme Court before Democrats lose control of Congress in November's mid-term elections.

The usual Democratic suspects, who all seem to have received copies of the leaked document overnight, issued statements of outrage, disgust, yada yada yada just before sunrise. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck "Charles" Schumer said SCOTUS seemed "poised to inflict the greatest restriction of rights in the past 50 years – not just on women but on all Americans."

Hellery Clinton, former secretary of state, former first lady, and former (and future?) contender for the presidensity, called the opinion "outrageous". (Apparently the adjective "unacceptable", meaning contrary to the liberal orthodoxy, has not been we widely adopted by the Democrats as by the Liberals of Canuckistan.)

Another Dumbocrat, New York Governor Kathy Hochul, said the draft opinion was a "disgraceful attack" on "women's right to choose", and said abortion would "always be safe and accessible" in the Empire State.

Ms Hochul was probably thinking about a recent report from the Guttmacher Institute, a pro-abortion policy and research NGO, on the probable effects of the overthrow of Roe v. Wade. They estimated that the 26 states coloured in red(ish), mostly in the South and Midwest, would ban abortion, and people in those states would need to travel, in some cases for days, to reach a clinic in a state with liberal abortion laws, coloured in blue(ish).

There should be a boom, then, in abortion tourism, and Ms Hochul expects New York to benefit. Visit the Empire State Building and the Statue of Liberty and have an unwelcome appendage removed at the same time.

Ms Hochul has probably not thought about [or, being American, is unaware of... Ed.] the competition from clinics on the north side of the World's Longest Undefended (and how!) Border. In Vancouver and Toronto, which have huge south Asian communities, sex-selective abortion -- killing unwanted girl babies -- is not just legal but a going concern. How terrible for the USA if the draft opinion is confirmed. More business lost to those crazy-but-progressive Canucks! 

Further reading: "After Chanting Outside SCOTUS All Night, Crowd Of Worshippers Still Can't Get Moloch To Answer Them", Babylon Bee, 3/5/22. Is it satire or not? You be the judge. [Geddit? Ed.]

UPDATE ADDED @ 1330: Further reading: "Supreme Court confirms leaked opinion on Roe v. Wade is 'authentic' but not a 'final position'", LifeSite News, 3/5/22. "Pro-lifers will have to wait a bit longer to find out if Roe v. Wade has really been overturned." If you don't want to wait, sign the petition at the bottom of the LifeSite page.

It is said that SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts has ordered the Marshal of the Court to investigate how the virtually unprecedented leak occurred. Walt's suggestion: Ask the most recent appointee to the bench what she knows!

Saints needed to stand up against the "most anti-Catholic President"

So says Fr. Jerry Pokorsky, a priest of the Diocese of Arlington VA and director of Human Life International. In his curiously-titled essay "In Gratitude for Joe Biden", published yesterday on the CatholicCulture.org website, Father Pokorsky calls Sleepy Joe "the most aggressively anti-Catholic President in history."

Why, then, should we be grateful to him? We'll come to that shortly, but first let's ask Father: But doesn't Mr Biden make a great show of being Catholic? Did he not say, in 2005, "The next Republican that tells me I'm not religious, I'm going to shove my rosary beads down their throat!"? 

That is true, says Fr. Pokorsky, but  despite Mr Biden's outward show of piety, "for most of his political life — from his consistent pro-abortion record to his officiating at a gay wedding in 2016 — despite his Catholic affiliation and public pious practices, Joe Biden has magnified and institutionalized countless major violations of the Ten Commandments."

"The hypocrisy rivals that of the chief priests and Pharisees, and is worthy of the same condemnation," Fr. Pokorsky writes. "Indeed, Biden is the most aggressively anti-Catholic President in history."

Why would the priest say that? Because of the hypocrisy -- the dichotomy between his outward show of piety on the one hand and his record of supporting evil on the other. "Biden’s habitual and unapologetic sinful acts are on full display." 

There's a lot more to being a faithful Catholic, Fr. Pokorsky says, than carrying a rosary, the priest declares. "It is presumptuous and dangerous to proclaim oneself as a devout Catholic or to encourage (or even allow) the description." Indeed, Jesus said, "Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father..." (St. Matthew 7:21 DRV)

China Joe's positions on key moral issues are hardly consistent with his description of himself as a Catholic. For instance, he has declared himself committed to codifying Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. And he has promised to appoint judges "that respect foundational precedents like Roe."

But wait, there's more.... Mr Biden has also called on Congress to quickly pass the Equality Act, which would add sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. And there's his nomination of Xavier Becerra to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. See "Biden names never-Trumper and gender ideologue to HHS", WWW 26/2/21.

Fr. Pokorsky argues persuasively that Mr Biden's insistent claim that he is a devout Catholic forces an "unavoidable choice." We either: stand with the Church and reject Biden's "iconic culture-of-death policies," or we join those who "celebrate Biden’s flouting of Church teaching."

So why should we be thankful that Sleepy Joe now now snoozes in the Oval Office, waking every now and then to undo some of the good done by President Trump? Because, Father says, "The election of Biden has forced a crisis. From the ashes, we can expect the Holy Spirit to raise up successors to those who opposed another anti-Catholic tyrant: Saint John Fisher and Saint Thomas More. May there be many of them!" Amen.