Roe Vs Wade: Why am I Not Surprised?
Summary: In 1973, seven out of nine Supreme Court judges ruled that the federal Constitution protects every woman’s reproductive freedom. This means they can have an abortion or make other decisions regarding their reproductive wellbeing without being prosecuted for it. That landmark ruling has now been overturned and as a result, women in states that have anti-abortion laws can be prosecuted if they get an abortion.
So what does this mean for Nigeria?
Not much. Nigeria has often toed the line of conservative, republican America. Many people worry (with good reason) that this new ruling will set back many people advocating for abortion rights in the country. Why? Because Nigeria likes to copy America.
But here’s the thing. Nigeria did not copy America’s pro-LGBTQ stance, at least by constitutional standards. This country is an Olympic gold medalist in cherry-picking.
What about the new ruling itself and its implications?
I think it’s a frustrating decision for many but it’s obvious why this happened.
I’ll explain.
The Supreme court is a graveyard for diversity and as such, you have decisions being made for people by those (read: white men) who should not be making those decisions — or at least, should be balanced out by other people.
In the Supreme Court of the United States of America, the white male reigns supreme.
This may get me in trouble but I’m reluctant to see it solely as men making decisions over women’s bodies. Yes, I know it is (white) men who largely ruled in favour of overturning the Roe vs Wade ruling from 1973 that made abortion legal. I’m just saying that I don’t think it’s solely because they’re men (who want to control women’s bodies). So is it a gender issue? Yes, but not entirely. Men played a key role but not just on the basis of them being men.
Funny enough, it was also (white) men that ruled to uphold bodily autonomy back then. Were they not looking to control women and their bodies back then?
I’m saying this because, in such situations, ideology plays as much a role as gender. Most conversations I’ve seen in favour of and against abortions have been hinged, not just on women’s rights, but on liberalism vs conservationism. And as such, you see both men and women speaking for and against it. Politically, you have as many conservatives as you do liberals on both sides of the divide. You see as many male senators as you see female senators speaking in favour of a ban on abortions, or against it.
And beyond abortions, when you look at the supreme court justices, what do you see?
You see that representation doesn’t always translate into expanded rights for the people being represented. Often, judicial philosophy takes precedence. For instance, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a woman and Justice Clarence Thomas, an African-American man, have often sided with their white male conservative colleagues.
You see that the Supreme Court only just got its first Black female justice in 2022. This should also come with the realisation that there still are many Americans who have never been reflected on the court.
You see that there’s never been a Supreme Court judge of Asian or Native American descent. Or even a Muslim justice.
You see that seven of the nine Supreme Court judges spent most of their careers in the Northeast, and most went to either Harvard or Yale law schools. None went to a public law school or university.
You see that most of the current justices were well off financially growing up. (The exceptions are the two justices of colour. Justice Thomas grew up poor in Georgia, and Justice Sotomayor grew up in public housing in the Bronx.
You see that minorities — people of colour and women — are still in a place where they have to rely on the generosity of white men.
Point is: the US Supreme court is where diversity goes to die (mostly).
How then, can anyone realistically expect the Supreme court to largely rule in favour of the rights of minorities and the marginalised?
It’s sad and frustrating but the overwhelmingly common outcome of this situation is that the interpretations of Americans’ rights — for instance, the right to have a lawyer, the right to abortion, and protection against gender-based discrimination will continue to be made almost exclusively by White men.
Until there’s more diversity in such spaces, not a lot will change.
So maybe don’t use the USA as your yardstick for freedom and liberty. It’s cool ro but in real life, you’d get better inspiration from other countries when it comes to diversity and inclusion.
