The nightmare of Democrats and pro-choicers seems set to come true, according to a leaked draft Supreme Court decision: No longer is the 1973 decision recognizing women’s constitutional right to have an abortion, which sets a precedent in a country where the federal government does not provide a legislative framework on pregnancy terminations.

The news, reported last week by the Politico website, caused an earthquake. However, it will have to wait until the end of June or the beginning of July, four months before the mid-term election, for the country’s highest court to give its final decision.

If the precedent is properly and truly reversed, the choice of allowing, restricting or completely banning abortion is in the United States, twenty of whom are willing to ban it or restrict it in a meaningful way.

Furious, Democrats are however powerless in front of a court with a conservative supermajority and a Senate that they barely control.

In theory, Congress could enact legislation to ensure the safety of Roe v. wade. The day after the publication of the Politico site document, the leader of the Democratic majority in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, also announced his intention to submit to the Senate vote a bill that would recognize the right to abortion. whole country.

A vote on this law is not an abstract exercise. It is just as urgent and truehe begged, lamenting a dark and troubled day for America.

” Let’s vote to protect women’s right to choose, and every American will see which side every senator stands on. “

Through press releases, declarations, tweets, television interviews and emails asking for funds, other Democrats were also quick to barricade themselves to denounce a offensive against women’s rights.

Two pro-choice Republican senators, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, who each endorsed the nomination of two Supreme Court justices appointed by Donald Trump, also expressed their disappointment.

According to Politico, the three justices appointed by the former Republican president were among those in favor of ousting the Roe vs. Wade.

Such a return would be completely incompatible with what the judges [Neil] Gorsuch at [Brett] Kavanaugh said at their auditions and at our meetingsSenator Collins said in a statement.

When he explained his support for their respective appointments, he expressed his confidence that the two judges would respect the precedents set by the Court on this issue.

If the final decision of the Supreme Court goes in the direction indicated by the leaked preliminary version, it will shake my confidence in the courtsaid Senator Murkowski, who gave him approval for the appointment of judges Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett.

A definite vote

In the absence of support, the announced vote will have only symbolic significance.

In theory, a bill could be passed by the Senate with a simple majority of 51 votes at the end of the debates.

However, under Senate rules, it is necessary, for most legislative texts, that 60 senators, i.e., three-fifths of the elected officials, first agree during the vote on the procedure to end the debates and pass the vote.

By extension, this 60-vote rule, which can block the passage of bills even if they have majority support, is referred to as a filibuster.

However, last February, a very similar project allowing abortion, titled the Law protecting women’s health and approved by the House of Representatives, did not exceed the 60 -vote threshold. Democrat Joe Manchin, considered a centrist, even joined 47 Republicans who blocked the bill, of which 46 Democrats subscribed.

Senators Collins and Murkowski, for their part, are proposing a bill that allows abortion, with more moderate coverage, where the Democratic camp shows no appetite.

On the eve of midterm elections in November, the Democratic initiative was more aimed at forcing Republican senators to commit, while a majority of Americans say they support abortion in all or most of the cases.

Cited by the site The hill, Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the senators would be called comment on some aspect of the questionsuch as cases where women seeking abortion have become victims of rape or incest.

Many bills have been passed or considered by Republican-led states, but not all, provide exceptions for these reasons or for risks posed to maternal health, for example.

Call for the disappearance of “filibuster”

Some Democratic elected officials and voters have therefore reiterated their call for Senate Democrats to remove the filibuster, an option callednuclear options.

An approach that finds supporters right within the institution.

According to a compilation of Washington Post published in June, 21 senators, including Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar, were in favor of removing this rule and 27 pushed for reform of this rule.

Many have returned to the case in recent days, including Bernie Sanders, who pleaded guilty to his case on Twitter on Monday night.

” Congress needs to pass legislation that makes Roe vs. wade the law of the land […] NOW. And if there aren’t 60 votes in the Senate that will do it, and there isn’t, we have to end the filibuster to get through 50 votes. “

The Senate simply needs a majority to change its policies. An unreachable threshold in current circumstances.

On the Republican side, Senators Collins and Murkowski, despite their support for abortion, are unwilling to take this step.

And, most of all, Democratic Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Cinema are fierce defenders of this rule. On Tuesday, the two senators considered moderate both reaffirmed their opposition to any change in this direction.

The filibuster is the only protection we have in a democracythe senator argued in West Virginia.

Senate protections against eroding women’s access to health care have been used half a dozen times over the past decade, and are more important than ever.in part his colleague from Arizona, who was pro-choice, argued in a press release.

According to the Axios website, a senator’s spokesman explained that current Senate rules protect the right to abortion seven times, because bills aimed at restricting access do not exceed the 60-vote threshold.

A dangerous approach

And even if the Senate rejects the filibuster, a bill that would legalize abortion is unlikely to go ahead, because the Democratic camp has two senators who say they are pro-lifeJoe Manchin and Bob Casey.

In the unlikely event that Democrats will still go this route nuclearthe approach will not be without risk for them in the future.

This is all the more true because, a few months before the ballot that will play a third of the seats in the Senate (and all seats in the House of Representatives), the polls have not, so far, been convincing for them.

Republicans not only seem to be on track to regain control of the House, but also have a chance to regain the Senate.

Should there ever be a double victory in Congress followed by the return of a Republican to the White House after the 2024 election, then they will have more freedom to implement a conservative program – which could even include the enactment of a law. restrictions on abortion nationwide.

Asked by USA TodaySenate Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell responded that a federal ban on abortion would can.

According to Washington Poston the strength of their expected success in the fall of Roe vs. wadeactivists and some elected Republicans began to mobilize in favor of possible federal law that would ban abortion after 15 or even 6 weeks of pregnancy.

If the success of such an initiative seems unlikely in the eyes of some observers, the new hobby of the opponents of abortion, which is now galvanized, shows that they do not intend to lower their arms.

Democrats aim to put the right to abortion in the middle of the November ballot. On an issue that has so far mobilized Republican voters, they now hope that news that a bomb has had an impact will allow them to mobilize the majority of voters.