Congressman Kilmer, Senator Cantwell react to overturning of Roe v. Wade

Leader News Staff
news@ptleader.com
Posted 6/24/22

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Friday morning to overturn Roe v. Wade — a landmark 1973 ruling to protect a woman’s right to an abortion — U.S. Representative …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in

Congressman Kilmer, Senator Cantwell react to overturning of Roe v. Wade

Posted

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Friday morning to overturn Roe v. Wade — a landmark 1973 ruling to protect a woman’s right to an abortion — U.S. Representative Derek Kilmer vowed to push for federal action "to protect reproductive rights.”

“Today’s decision by the Supreme Court is outrageous – and tragically, a threat to women’s health everywhere," Kilmer, Washington's 6th District congressman, said in a statement.

"We know that at least 25 states are expected to severely limit or ban abortion in the wake of this ruling – and Republicans in even more states, including Washington, will now undoubtedly make efforts to limit access to reproductive health care,” Kilmer said. “In addition, Republicans in Congress have made clear that they intend to pass a federal abortion ban, putting health and safety at risk.”

U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell called the Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling "a sledgehammer to the right to privacy.”

“This is a sad and tragic day in America. Millions of Americans are losing their rights to control their own bodies and their own healthcare,” Cantwell said.

“Despite decades of Republican Supreme Court nominees coming before the Judiciary Committee and saying that they believe Roe v. Wade is settled law, they have taken a sledgehammer to the right to privacy,” she added.

Although abortion will remain legal in Washington, 20-plus states across the U.S. are likely to ban or have already passed trigger laws, outlawing the medical procedure immediately or within weeks of Roe v. Wade being overturned.

Kilmer said women’s reproductive choices should not be made by politicians.

“Let me be clear: Decisions about reproductive health care, including abortions, are best made by women in consultation with their doctors. These deeply personal decisions should not be interfered with or replaced by the judgment of politicians,” Kilmer said. “That’s why I’ve strongly opposed efforts to roll back reproductive rights. It’s why I voted for the Women’s Health Protection Act to enshrine the rights granted under Roe v. Wade into federal law. I’ll keep pushing for federal action to protect reproductive rights.”

Cantwell noted the majority support of Americans for the 1973 Supreme Court decision and called for citizens to vote and exercise their voices in opposition to the recent overturning. 

“We know that 70 percent of Americans did not want to see Roe v. Wade overturned. They want these rights upheld. Mainstream Americans have counted on this right, depended on this right, exercised this right, and now several justices on the Supreme Court are going back on their word and upending settled law to take this right away,” Cantwell said.

“I am hopeful that Americans will respond, as we always have when our rights are taken away. The 70 percent of Americans who agree must have their voices heard on the constitutional right to privacy. I’m calling on all Americans who believe in this right to exercise their voice and their vote. Every legislative tool and initiative process should be considered,” she added.

Fear over the future of reproductive rights escalated in early May, when a leaked Supreme Court draft opinion on Roe v. Wade was reported by the website Politico.

With Roe v. Wade being overturned, the status of reproductive rights will be left to the states, with Idaho, Arkansas, Wyoming, and others already passing measures to ban abortions within days or weeks.

“I am deeply concerned about the threat that this decision presents for reproductive freedom and about the potential that this decision could lead to the erosion of further rights that we hold dear. We cannot – and should not – accept a future in which the next generation of Americans have fewer rights than their parents,” Kilmer said.

Washington passed legislation in 1991 to protect women’s reproductive rights.

Comments

10 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here

  • ecorep

    In a crazy twist,.... defenders of wildlife, sea life and plant life revel in the taking of human life. For what other kind of life is it. Yes life growing dependent on the life of another, but would they not say "we are all in this together, dependent on one another or why do we pay so much tax.

    And what is magical about 23 weeks, surely no baby can live outside the womb for many years without a nurturing hand. But even if some relent to six weeks necessitating a pregnancy test every month of ***ual activity( 5 min out of your life) they would rise up and may hate me forever,... because I stop to think about something that "is not mine"

    Friday, June 24 Report this

  • tjberry

    Goofy has spoken. As usual he panders to his base. The ******** issue deserves more. It's a complicated issue that is in dire need of solid leadership which he lacks in spades.

    Friday, June 24 Report this

  • serinusjv

    The ruling was 6-3, not 5-4.

    Saturday, June 25 Report this

  • ecorep

    Yes but #6 was an entirely intellectual application of the law. Should that count.

    Saturday, June 25 Report this

  • serinusjv

    My apologies. I was wrong.

    Saturday, June 25 Report this

  • Justin Hale

    ******** is not a Constitutional right, it is a Non-Enumerated Right Retained by the People, therefore subject to the laws of the individual states.

    Roe always had limitations on ********, hence the original Trimester timeline, which was amended by Cassey v. Roe which moved the timeline to 24 weeks. The Roe decision always provided a way for the timelines to be amended by the states as science improved our ability to determine "viability".

    I am not anti-********, I just believe that there is a point when ******** is the taking of a human life, should those lives have rights? I believe they should.

    Saturday, June 25 Report this

  • Justin Hale

    Really??? The stupid damn censor program the Leader uses doesn't allow the word a b or tion???? So much for free press.

    Saturday, June 25 Report this

  • MargeS

    So that would be say when their in grade school, high school, at a club, in a grocery store, etc. The Supreme Court just let us all know that our lives are only important before we are born!

    Sunday, June 26 Report this

  • Justin Hale

    "The Supreme Court just let us all know that our lives are only important before we are born!".....The Supreme Court just let us all know that our lives are important before we are born!

    Sunday, June 26 Report this

  • ecorep

    When I finish reading all 213 pages I'll let you know if they were thinking of you at all.

    www.supremecourt.gov/opinions

    Monday, June 27 Report this