Ohio Supreme Court Candidate Patrick Fischer Compares Roe v. Wade To Dred Scott And Plessy v. Ferguson

Patrick Fischer, a former professional ice hockey forward who briefly played for the Arizona Coyotes in the National Hockey League (NHL), is a Swiss ice hockey coach. He was born on September 6, 1975. He primarily competed in the National League A in his own nation. He now serves as the Swiss national team’s head coach.

During the 1992–93 season, Fischer made his professional debut with EV Zug in the Swiss National League A (NLA). He joined HC Lugano, a member of the NLA, in 1997 and helped the team win the Swiss title in 1999. Fischer left Lugano after two years and joined HC Davos, where he stayed until the end of the 2002–03 season. He won the Spengler Cup in 2000 and a Swiss title in 2002 while living in Davos.

Read More:

Ohio City, Ohio In recent statements made before a group of Republicans outside Columbus, Ohio Supreme Court Justice Patrick Fischer, a Republican running for reelection, compared abortion to slavery and segregation. On July 14, Fischer gave a speech to the Delaware City Republican Club in which he contrasted Roe v. Wade with two rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court that perpetuated slavery and segregation. A recording of his statements was obtained by Cleveland.com/The Plain Dealer.

Do you understand what substantive due process is, ladies and gentlemen? I could go into it for hours,” he remarked. But you know what the foundation is for, right? the ruling on Dred Scott. Very bad. On this, Plessy v. Ferguson was based. Very bad. And Roe v. Wade was founded on that.

Republicans around the nation have increasingly compared abortion to slavery, even though Fischer later clarified that his purpose wasn’t to dispute the legal foundations of those decisions or to compare abortion to slavery or segregation. Republican U.S. Senate candidate J.D. Vance in Ohio compared abortion to slavery, saying that “although the individuals who obviously suffer the most are those subject to it, I think it has this morally corrupting effect on the entire society.”

Former Iowa congressman Steve King and Minnesota lieutenant governor candidate Matt Birk, a former NFL player, also draw comparisons. Author David French stated in the pro-conservative National Review in 2016 that white enslavers considered Black people as property during American slavery and were free to do “anything they wanted to that slave, whatever that they chose.” The “unborn life” is considered in a similar way when a pregnancy is aborted, according to French.

Ronald Regan accomplished this in 1984, according to Ayesha Bell Hardaway, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University and co-director of the school’s Social Justice Institute. It has received a lot of attention in Republican politics for a while. Evidently, Justice (Clarence) Thomas of the United States Supreme Court has taken exception to parts of it in each of his dissents before Dobbs. It is nothing new.

The June 24 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overruled Roe v. Wade and gave abortion rights to the states. A bill that would essentially criminalise abortion in most situations in the state is anticipated to be advanced by the Ohio General Assembly and Governor Mike DeWine by the end of the year.

Fischer’s comments were in response to a question from a member of the Delaware City Republican Club audience on whether the Ohio Supreme Court would rule on abortion rights in the upcoming year. The state’s judicial behaviour laws, according to Fischer, forbid him from discussing specific cases in public. The Ohio Supreme Court is currently hearing a case involving abortion rights organisations requesting the court to invalidate the alleged foetal “heartbeat” law.

Fischer did, however, express his opinions, stating that he had the same sentiments 38 years prior, when he was dating his wife, and that the legal justification for Roe v. Wade, known as substantive due process, was insufficient. Fischer, who received honours from Harvard Law School, said: “But I told her that if you ever got enough people with guts, that would theoretically — on a theory, on a legal theoretical foundation — easily (be) overturned.”

‘Infantilizes Black People

The Dred Scott judgement from the U.S. Supreme Court in 1857 ruled that Scott, who resided in a free state, was not entitled to freedom. Blacks were not and could not become citizens of the United States, it added. It is regarded by legal experts as one of the worst rulings of the US Supreme Court.

Segregation laws were permitted by Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896 as long as Blacks had access to “separate but equal” facilities. Hardaway argued that slavery was inhumane, unethical, sexist, and racist. Black people were subjected to physical, mental, and spiritual torment.

She stated, “I find it distressing that there is this parallel to a foetus. People who were in slavery were real, breathing, fully formed human beings who could make their own decisions but were denied the rights to personal autonomy and self-determination. It disrespectfully and inappropriately infantilizes Black people.

A majority of Ohioans, according to public polls, want to defend abortion rights, according to David Pepper, a former chairman of the Ohio Democratic Party and an attorney who teaches election law at the University of Cincinnati College of Law.

They are clinging to weak strands in an effort to defend something they are well aware is profoundly unpopular with mainstream Ohioans, he claimed. “So people are reaching at straws to try to explain away something that most Ohioans are still startled about, as evidenced by this analogy to slavery. People’s outrage over incidents like the one involving the 10-year-old victim, which we have all heard about, won’t be lessened by this.

What is Substantive Due Process?

Fischer explained to the Delaware City Republicans that in the cases of Dred Scott, Plessy v. Ferguson, and Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court applied substantive due process. A legal doctrine known as a substantive due process enables courts to uphold rights that aren’t listed or explicitly stated in the U.S. Constitution. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, which guarantee citizens “due process of law” before governments can rob them of life, liberty, or property, is the foundation of the idea.

Fischer described it as contentious. He claimed that it “gives judges a blank check that enables them to dictate policy, which violates the fundamental notion of separation of powers.” “Some courts have wrongly stretched the due process clause from its original role as an objective and neutral arbiter of fairness to a subjective rubber band that allows judges to substitute their own personal — often partisan — policy preferences for those of the people’s elected representatives,” he said in an email.

“These cases range from Dred Scott to the present. Lincoln denounced the idea, and I said the same in a recent address, for its application in the dishonest and racist Dred Scott decision. Fischer stated that he agreed with the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s assertion that the 1973 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Roe would have had a better constitutional foundation if it had been made under a different provision of the Fourteenth Amendment, the equal protection clause.

Ginsburg said it should have been founded on gender equality rather than privacy rights through substantive due process. According to Fischer, not all cases determined by the U.S. Supreme Court using substantive due process must be overturned. In the Dobbs abortion decision, he stated that he agreed with Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion, emphasising that “overruling Roe does not necessitate the overruling of other decisions, and does not endanger or put doubt on those precedents.”

The Ohio-based Obergefell v. Hodges case, which allowed same-sex unions, the use of contraceptives, and the ability of mixed-race couples to wed, is another example of precedent. According to Pepper, a former chair of the Ohio Democratic Party, Fischer’s justification for substantive due process means that those rights will also be at risk.

He claimed that once substantive due process is eliminated, the fight against abortion is no longer an issue. In the 450-page ruling in the Dred Scott case, Pepper added, there is only one statement referring to substantive due process. Fischer’s inclusion of the Dred Scott case with the others, according to him, was deceptive. That is a cynical twisting of history, in my opinion, Pepper remarked.

‘I Give Him Credit For Being Transparent’

According to Fischer, people shouldn’t infer from his comments about a legal theory how he would decide on any particular abortion case. Pepper says, “I give him credit for being open about what he would do.” Pepper is not buying it. Because of their “overarching judicial role to apply and uphold the law without regard to [their] personal beliefs,” judges in Ohio are advised not to make pledges, promises, or commitments.

The code stipulates that in order to build and increase respect for and confidence in the judiciary, campaigns for judicial seats “must be conducted differently from campaigns for other offices.” “Judicial candidates have a specific responsibility to make sure the legal system is seen as fair, neutral, and devoid of partisanship.”

In general, voters benefit by meeting judicial candidates, according to Catherine Turcer, executive director of the good government organisation Common Cause Ohio, because there is so little information available about them. On November 8, Fischer will go up against Democrat Terri Jamison, a judge on Ohio’s 10th District Court of Appeals.

It presents a dilemma because first amendment rights also apply to judges and justices. It can be difficult to avoid making promises when speaking, she noted. The Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct advises prospective judges to avoid promising or discussing specific cases in the future.

We can also assess whether Justice Fischer gave too strong of a commitment to abortion cases that may or may not come before him. It’s intriguing to learn how he saw the genuine due process, though. Dred Scott is included among the other cases. That is a cynical twisting of history, in my opinion, Pepper remarked.

For more information like this do visit lakecountyfloridanews.com

Leave a Comment