Roe V Wade: Australian Liberal Senator Supports Roe v Wade’s Overturn

As the Roe v Wade decision has been overturned by the US Supreme Court, a senator from Australia said that the ruling is “profoundly empowering” democracy, despite the fact that it was widely misunderstood by most Australians.

It comes after the US Supreme Court, in a 6-3 ruling powered by its conservative majority, upheld a Mississippi law that bans abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has criticized the decision and called it “a setback to women’s rights and freedom to manage their bodies .”

The sentiment was shared by Katy Gallagher (federal Minister for Women), who said Monday that the ruling reinforced “the need to stay vigilant because hard-fought victories before our Parliament could be easily taken .”

Epoch Times Photo
Pro-abortion activists (R) argue with pro-life activists in front of the Supreme Court in Washington on June 26, 2022. (Nathan Howard/Getty Images)

‘Judicial Activism’

However, the outgoing Queensland Liberal Senator Amanda Stoker claimed that the US Supreme Court decision was “misunderstood”, because it “doesn’t mean that abortion has been prohibited in the US .”

“This simply means state parliaments will, who are elected and responsible to citizens, be able make their own decisions about the issue in accordance with those citizens’ values,” Stoker explained to The Epoch Times.

“This is incredibly empowering for democracy .”

The Liberal senator, a former prosecutor at Queensland’s Director of Public Prosecutions, noted that overruling Roe v Wade “corrects the error” made in 1973.

She claimed it was when the US Supreme Court found a right for abortion in the Constitution, even though it wasn’t stated in the .”

See also  Mollying a "second civil war"


” Such judicial activism removes authority from citizens to decide on contentious issues like abortion and places it in the hands unelected and unaccountable judges,” Stoker said.

Associate justice Samuel A. Alito stated that Roe V Wade and the later confirmation, Planned Parenthood, were “exceptionally fragile” and an “abuse of judicial power .”

” The Constitution doesn’t prohibit citizens from prohibiting or regulating abortion. Roe and Casey rescinded that power. He stated that they would now uphold those decisions and give the authority back to the people, and their elected representatives.”

Epoch Times Photo
Pro-life protesters celebrate the overturn of Roe v. Wade in Washington on June 24, 2022. (Courtesy of Students for Life of America)

Roe v Wade Reignites Abortion Debate in Australia

Hundreds of Australians gathered Monday in front the US Consulate, Perth, Australia in support of “solidarity” abortion rights rallies .”

Stoker stated, “The tragedy of the divided nature of public discussion on this topic is that, as a country, we miss an opportunity to engage in the underlying factors which make abortion attractive to some .”

“We should instead ask the question: How can families and women be supported to proceed confidently with a pregnancy even though it was unplanned ?”

“This is the conversation that will make our society more beautiful .”

Australia has fully decriminalised abortion in all states, with South Australia becoming the last jurisdiction to remove abortion from the criminal codes in 2021.

Women are permitted to abort their child up until birth under the laws of Victoria and Queensland. This is based on their social, physical and psychological circumstances.

Stoker cautioned that such “radical” abortion laws lack “very few safeguards” to prevent it from being administered as an act coercive control, or as a further handicap to a already vulnerable woman .”

See also  FBI Returned Passports Seized in Mar-a-Lago, Trump Says

Nina Nguyen


Nina Nguyen, a Sydney-based reporter. Her focus is on identity, culture, and social news in Australia. Fluent in Vietnamese, she is also fluent. Contact her at [email protected].

Read More

Previous post New Zealand PM Pushes For Nuclear Disarmament, Calls Out China’s Human Rights Abuses at NATO Event
Next post Insubstantial Due Procedure