Overturning Roe - Its Hidden Importance to Critical Medical Matters
#157 The Rowen Report
Dear Subscriber,
Yesterday, the USSC issued an opinion overturning a half century of legal practice on abortion. I want to weigh in from my perspective as an alternative physician and ardent defender of the constitution. My comments have nothing to do with my personal opinion on abortion which I keep to myself, but to the law.
The Constitution was written to LIMIT what government(s) could do. The Framers were righteously indignant of government overreach, intrusion, trampling of rights, etc. A major power of Congress is “regulating commerce among the states…..”. That power was violently expanded in the Roosevelt era under threat of the statist president packing the court. Justice Owens Roberts switched his vote on one case regarding commerce, and in fear of court packing, the entire court permitted the Congress to regulate anything that could even affect commerce.
The depression case was about a farmer who was growing extra wheat for his own animals. None of it was for sale ANYWHERE on the market. The extra wheat above his allotment did not cross state lines. But in a BIZARRE twist of logic, the court reasoned that the farmer’s growing of wheat for his own animals affected commerce regarding wheat. By growing his own, he was not buying wheat on the open market and therefore affecting interstate commerce and therefore the FEDERAL government had the power to destroy his farm sustenance. We are left with the legacy of this ruling, in my opinion, second worst in US history, second only to the horrible Dred Scott case, which ruled that men and women of color had no legal standing. This commerce ruling and a few others in the Roosevelt era ushered in the era of draconian federal power via unelected agency officials and legislating activist judges, not too dissimilar to what we have faced with forced COVID vaccination. We live with this nightmare even until today.
On to Roe. I’ve read the entire constitution over and over. Nowhere does it empower the national government to have anything to do with abortion. Further, nowhere does the Constitution empower the federal government to have anything to do with health care. The Constitution specifically FORBIDS any federal power not enumerated to the national government in the Constitution. Non-enumerated powers are to be kept by the states. The federal government has no Constitutional power to decide whether abortion is legal or not. It is a matter for each state to decide whether it’s legal or not for a woman to have an abortion in that state.
A surprise to me, even the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (champion of women’s rights and considered very “liberal”) called Roe "heavy-handed judicial intervention," and the prominent progressive law professor and Obama administration official Cass Sunstein believes Roe "way over-reached."’’ (Newsweek Opinion article, reference below). While Trump was castigated for his conservative appointments and will be so blamed, it appears that Ginsburg’s successor simply voted as SHE would have done on this issue!
Folks, I fear the controlled divisive press is going to deliberately stimulate a firestorm similar to the Floyd matter and deliberately foster mayhem. With Floyd, a man was killed by police violence, which violence was met with even more violence by rioters, looters and creators of mayhem, including a prominent organization, whose leaders are now known to be diverting donations to private mansions in LA, instead of benefitting the lives of people of color. All this was fueled by a press agenda to divide us.
Now we may have those who care to “defend” abortion calling for a Kristallnacht of violence expanding use of violence in response for an unwelcome political event. What have we become?
Why do I care about this?
Why do I care about this? I firmly believe the federal government has overstepped its bounds on most matters. The federal government was created by then sovereign states to defend our borders, protect the nation (military), create post offices, create a uniform standard of REAL MONEY (gold/silver coin is our LAWFUL money) and make sure one state did not unfairly punish another in matters of commerce (imports and exports), and handle foreign affairs along with a few other powers. Look how the monetary system has been bastardized and corrupted by the feds. The federal government was never given the power to declare worthless paper as legal tender, and we now are enslaved by limitless said paper currency debt, from seemingly limitless printing and unconstitutional giving away of this paper currency. In my humble opinion, this is the real cause of inflation. (Our Founders warned about cancerous growth of government, and tried their best to prevent that in the Constitution. They could not foresee everything).
Health matter powers were retained 100% by the states. I don’t like the ramifications of outlawing abortion in some states as women may turn again to coat hangers and back-alley abortionists. But we have tyranny if judges make laws where they have no authority to, or the national government exerts un-Constitutional powers that are Constitutionally retained by the states. And, I am also concerned that some states, in a short-sighted backlash, might make abortion legal up to the time of delivery, leaving an essentially term baby to die after “birth” by neglect. I believe I’ve seen passage of some laws like this. Correct me if I am wrong.
Overturning Roe vs Wade does NOT outlaw abortion in this country as many seem to errantly believe. It hands back regulating this matter to the states under the 9th and 10th amendments. If Roe were allowed to stand, it would ultimately permit the feds to regulate medical decisions in my office on other medical matters, under the same twisted logic that permitted it in the first place. How is it possible to limit the feds to just the abortion medical matter under the guise of privacy, etc? How is it that the state was prohibited by the feds from banning abortion, but permitted to ban my dissemination of balancing COVID information to adults? This single medical procedure, abortion, got a whacky but free federally protected ride, while alternative doctors have feared for their licenses for providing desired helpful services.
The federal government is already owned by Pharma. Hence, my ability to practice is already limited severely by the FDA. I used to have a whole cadre of methods to help patients. But the FDA as prohibited my access to European homeopathics and other medicines.
I want the federal government out of my office as a middleman decision maker in patient care, including VAXXING. The overturning of Roe vs Wade logically supports the physician making medical decisions, not the federal government! I also want all government authorities out, whether state or federal. My duty is to you, the patient, not the corrupt system the corrupt government protects. If I wantonly injure you absent informed consent, you are the one to have common law recourse.
To Your Excellent Health,
Robert Jay Rowen, MD
https://www.newsweek.com/roe-was-wrong-day-it-was-decided-supreme-court-did-right-thing-opinion-1719085
Dr Rowan, I want to thank you for articulating this perspective, for your use of the term statist, and for reminding us of the consequential 1942 court decision on US Govt v farmer Roscoe Filburn.
As a farmer making cropping decisions I have indeed lost sovereignty over the years, as you have in medicine. The list of crops — good, nutritious organic food and natural medicines — that I no longer market or produce for the general public has lengthened over the years as regulations complicate and proliferate, and constrains tightened over what information I am allowed to communicate to my customers. Just two examples: safe effective pain relief for arthritis or gout, and safe effective birth control, both research supported, tried and tested with long records of use, and organically grown on the farm. Suppressed. Lost. Who among you know what I’m talking about?
While individual sovereignty as to food and medicine is my ideal, I, too, welcome movement towards greater localization of control and away from centralized control. I do see it as a step in the right direction.
As a farmer, I may be wary of county regulators, but at least we live in the same community and have the opportunity to develop relationships. We work at it —talking together, meeting together, informing each other. But when the Feds show up, sometimes literally with guns, it can be a different story.
My experience is that most people today are unaware of just how regulated, pressured, and constrained farmers are, unaware of the culture that has been lost. The carve-out for the protection of organic production (the NOP) was a vast effort, hard fought, and is under constant attack. Again, a similar story to the efforts to protect alternative medicine.
You have my sincere thanks, Dr Rowan, for the efforts you make and the risks you take to educate and share with us.
To Herb,
You said , "I am not aware of any defenders of a woman’s right to choose who have engaged in violent actions. " Please see this link: https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/christian-persecutions-the-us/.
A retired health professional walked into my office today and told me of many instances of mayhem in the recent days dealing with pro-abortion which the mainstream press has ignored. I can understand why you are not aware.
I have not said I am pro abortion, nor said I am against it. I remain steadfast as pro Constitution. I don't happen to like the laws of many countries, including Iran, and Islamist states. I am free not to go there, live there or patronize them. I don't like many of the laws of the Union state I live in. The USA was founded as a union of sovereign states with an agreement that any Citizen of one state could freely go to any other state. This is the time to consider it for anyone who considers the laws. of their state unacceptable. We are either a nation of laws or a nation of men ("men" here not referencing a gender/sex). I prefer the former.