We were told it was impossible, that Roe v. Wade was carved in stone — a “super-precedent” endorsed by all our country’s elites that liberal senators would ensure stayed in place forever by Borking every likely pro-life appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court.
When I joined the pro-life movement at age 11 — freaking out my parents by going door-to-door collecting signatures for the New York State Right to Life Party — I imbibed that same learned helplessness. We were advocates of a hopeless cause, like trying to number the grains of sand on a beach, but it was our duty at least to try. We could stand outside abortion clinics, convincing one mom or two to reconsider the value of her unborn baby’s life. We might impose waiting periods, or perhaps parental consent, or even ban gruesome late-term procedures on fully viable babies. Some of us would lock ourselves to the gates of clinics and go to jail for it.
But the great monstrosity that liberal judges had pretended to find in our Constitution, the “privacy” right that permitted abortion in 50 states no matter what voters had to say about it, was there to stay. For 50 years of my life, our courts and law schools have pretended that women could do what they want with their bodies as long they didn’t take illegal drugs, sell themselves for sex, or work at less than the minimum wage. It never made any sense.
But our entire system pretended that it did, and much of the GOP played along. Bad advisors to Ronald Reagan lied to him about the views of men like Anthony Kennedy and David Souter, and convinced him he had to appoint Sandra Day O’Connor to the Court. Republican senators like Lindsay Graham routinely voted to confirm rabidly pro-abortion justices based purely on their “scholarly credentials,” while Democrats (correctly) grilled appointees on which way they might rule on crucial issues.
President Donald Trump changed all that. He didn’t fold like a cheap tent when Christine Blasey Ford perjured herself with a story about a rape attempt that never happened at a party which never occurred that SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh didn’t attend. Any other Republican president of our lifetime, except perhaps Ronald Reagan, would have caved and withdrawn Kavanaugh’s name. Another Republican likely would have been spooked by Amy Coney Barrett’s large family and strong ties to a fervent Catholic group the media called a “cult.” Not Trump.
While he has been far from perfect on life issues (see IVF), Trump accomplished what virtually all of us in the pro-life movement considered a pipe dream: cutting out the cancer that was Roe v. Wade from the body of constitutional law. Now Barrett has published a book explaining how that happened with its judgment in Dobbs v. Jackson. CatholicVote reports:
In her forthcoming memoir, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett defends the landmark 2022 decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, calling the 1973 ruling an “exercise of raw judicial power” that invented a constitutional right to abortion.
In Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution, Barrett, a Catholic, argues that Roe had no grounding in American history or law and that abortion “had long been forbidden” in the nation’s legal tradition.
CNN was granted early access to the memoir. It reports:
Barrett, who joined the majority opinion by Justice Samuel Alito, makes clear in the book that she believes the court had no business declaring abortion a constitutional right in the first place. (Two of the other justices in the majority wrote separate statements, but Barrett declined at the time.)
She picks up Alito’s line from Dobbs that Roe v. Wade amounted to an “exercise of raw judicial power.” She echoes his view for the majority that the court’s usual adherence to precedent could be rejected because Roe was wrongly decided.
Elaborating in her book, Barrett contends the right to end a pregnancy was never deeply rooted in US history as were other implicit constitutional rights: “The evidence does not show that the American people have traditionally considered the right to obtain an abortion so fundamental to liberty that it ‘goes without saying’ in the Constitution. In fact, the evidence cuts in the opposite direction. Abortion not only lacked long-standing protection in American law – it had long been forbidden.”
Critical as I have been of Barrett for some of her other judicial opinions, I might go read her book. Learning about it, I know what I absolutely am going to do: reread Justice Samuel Alito’s masterful ruling in Dobbs that comprehensively dismantles the cobbled-together decisions in Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood, then go say a prayer of thanks for what Trump made possible.
We still have much work ahead, and that entails applying pressure from the right on Trump and his team until all 50 states protect the innocent.
We Must Exorcise the Transgender Spirit
“And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind?” (Matthew 11:7 KJV)
That’s certainly not a fit description of John the Baptist. It is, however, the perfect way to sum up overpraised and over-rewarded author Malcolm Gladwell, long the darling of the TED Talk set. So we can tell where the wind is blowing by which way Gladwell leans, and currently, it seems the transgender storm might be on its way back out to sea. Listen to Gladwell’s belated mea culpa for advocating “trans” boys’ invasion of women’s sports:
Malcolm Gladwell says he is “ashamed” of having said in a previous panel discussion that trans women have a place in women’s sports. He says he was “cowed” into saying so.
“Trans athletes have no place in the female category,” he says. pic.twitter.com/AjeKUJVPYD
— Benjamin Ryan (@benryanwriter) September 2, 2025
Since Gladwell has copped to being a coward, it’s safe to say he’s now running scared again: scared of the mounting backlash against the entitled, aggressive, and increasingly terroristic transgender movement.
Faster, please. The moment we see the end of the Gnostic, perversion-driven movement that claims to recognize 45 extra genders and demands we enable and coddle the symptoms of mental illness can’t come too soon.
An author with actual courage, John Daniel Davidson, makes that case boldly over at The Federalist. He writes:
The tragic news of the deadly mass shooting at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis last week was quickly followed by the unsurprising revelation that the shooter, a 23-year-old man, identified as trans.
It should be obvious by now that transgenderism — the entire industrial complex of medical interventions, legal actions, social affirmation, and political rhetoric now attached to what was once called gender dysphoria — is a serious threat to public safety. As such, it should be outlawed and eradicated from public life.
To be clear, I’m not saying that individuals who believe they are trans should be eradicated, but the gender ideology that affirms them in their delusion should be. Men and women suffering from this cruel delusion should have our compassion, and every effort should be made to bring them back to the reality of their biological sex. Public policy, however, should focus on the ideology of transgenderism and those who perpetrate it. We should treat it the way we treated radical Islamism after 9/11, or communism in the 1950s. It should be understood as a dangerous threat, and anyone advocating or working to advance it should be treated as a criminal and an enemy of the people.
Boom. That’s the right tone to use when talking about a wicked delusion fomented by the enemy. For too long, we’ve been terrified that trusting our judgment might seem judgmental, even as children were being groomed, dosed, and mutilated at clinics nationwide and parents stripped of custody for trying to protect them. In the face of this level of evil, being winsome loses all.
The U.S. Strikes Cartel-Linked Drug Smugglers with Ties to Election Fraud
Most media aren’t reporting on the backstory, but Trump’s strike on Venezuelan drug smugglers headed for the U.S. might have much broader implications than protecting our citizens from overdosing on fentanyl. As important as that is, there’s likely much more at stake, including the honesty of our country’s elections. As reported on social media:
President Trump has shared video of a deadly U.S. military strike on a drug-smuggling vessel from Venezuela, which killed 11 people.
On Truth Social, Trump stated: “Earlier this morning, on my Orders, U.S. Military Forces conducted a kinetic strike against positively identified… pic.twitter.com/dHoVn1bjoE
— gCaptain (@gCaptain) September 2, 2025
And much more seems like it’s about to happen. Trump is seeking to legally link the Tren de Aragua drug cartel to the Marxist government of Nicolas Maduro in Caracas. Maduro came to power via widely alleged election fraud made possible by electronic voting machines that many have linked to Dominion Systems. Way back in 2006, Lou Dobbs reported on CNN:
Smartmatic, the Electronic Voting Machine manufacturer whose machines are notorious for failures, is based in Venezuela. The Treasury Department, which is supposed to be the look into connections between sensitive US infrastructure and foreign interests, has failed yet again to protect the American people. What is more important than the correctness of our Democracy?
As Gateway Pundit points out: “After Smartmatic was sold to Sequoia, Sequoia was sold to Dominion in 2007!” As part of Fox News’s murky settlement with Dominion, Lou Dobbs was fired as a TV host in 2021. Was the software Maduro used to steal Venezuelan elections transfered to Dominion, and perhaps used in the U.S. in 2020? Dominion denies it, but Gateway Pundit isn’t convinced.
Trump is openly seeking Maduro’s overthrow and arrest, offering a $50 million bounty. Why is he so focused on this small, now-impoverished country? Emerald Robinson thinks she knows:
I told you months ago that investigations of election fraud IN AMERICA would lead to Venezuela.
Now Maduro admits publicly that he’s a puppet of China and gets special gifts from Xi Jinping.
The drug cartels and Maduro and China all work together against the USA. https://t.co/RW7fObQa53
— Emerald Robinson
(@EmeraldRobinson) September 3, 2025
If Maduro is forced from power, all the dirty little secrets in the world of election fraud might end up in the hands of Trump and his team. Stay tuned. The news from Venezuela in the next few weeks might prove very important to our future.
Outing and Doxxing Conservative Donors to Silence Them
Remember when the founder of Mozilla, Brendan Eich, got fired in 2014 after his donation to a traditional marriage campaign was revealed? That was the model for countless other acts of retaliation, debanking, and lawfare that were later aimed at conservatives and Christians.
Now the Democrat-run state of New Jersey is trying to “out” people who’ve donated to crisis pregnancy centers in order to shame people who try to support women choosing life in difficult circumstances, as are forces in Arizona.
The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) weighing in on an upcoming Supreme Court case challenging New Jersey’s demand for donor lists; the Goldwater Institute is leading the fight against Prop. 211 in a case that will be heard at the Arizona Suprme Court on Sept. 11.
ALEC filed an amicus brief in First Choice Women’s Resource Center v. Platkin, “a U.S. Supreme Court case challenging New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin’s sweeping demand for donor lists from a nonprofit pregnancy care provider. The case raises critical concerns about donor privacy, free speech, and access to federal courts,” ALEC asserts.
As the Goldwater Institute notes, if Prop. 211 is struck down, Arizona “could offer the first clear roadmap for mounting state constitutional challenges to donor-disclosure laws across the country. After all, disclosure is for the government. Privacy is for individuals.
“Arizona’s Proposition 211 is as un-American as it is dangerous. No one should be exposed to retaliation or violence simply for supporting causes they believe in,” Vice President of Litigation Jon Riches said. “The law also violates Arizona’s constitution, which provides stronger protections for freedom of speech and privacy than even the U.S. Constitution. That’s why we at the Goldwater Institute believe the Arizona Supreme Court will ultimately strike down Proposition 211.”
Along The Stream…
Be inspired by Raymond Ibrahim’s latest, “Christian Valor Overcomes Muslim Might.”
Later this morning, join Rabbi Jason Sobel, author of Signs and Secrets of the Messiah, as he explores the deeper meaning of Jesus’s miracles.
John Zmirak is a senior editor at The Stream and author or coauthor of 14 books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism. His newest book is No Second Amendment, No First.
The post The Brew: SCOTUS Justice Amy Coney Barrett Explains ‘Why We Overturned <i>Roe</i>’ in New Book appeared first on The Stream.