What would the overturning of Roe mean for Latin America?

 

Mexico City, Mexico, Dec 2, 2021 / 14:02 pm (CNA).

If the US Supreme Court were to overturn Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion across the country in 1973, what impact would it have on Latin America? Pro-life leaders in Latin America spoke to ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish language sister news agency, about how a ruling reversing Roe v. Wade would impact each of their countries.

A key effect, the leaders explained, is that there would be less pressure to legalize abortion in the region, which often comes politically and economically from the United States.

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments about the constitutionality of Mississippi’s 15-week state abortion ban Dec. 1. The case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, could overturn the court’s Roe v. Wade decision, which has barred restrictive early-term abortion laws like Mississippi’s for the past 48 years.

Rodrigo Iván Cortés, president of the National Front for the Family of Mexico, and vice president of the Political Network for Values, told ACI Prensa that a decision reversing Roe v. Wade “would mean a huge setback for the ideological activism for the culture of death” that the United States exerts in Latin America, especially under the Biden administration.

Cortés said, “it has been clearly noted that that administration is putting pressure on Mexico to change laws and policies to impose abortion.”

In addition, he said that this change “would mean a very important example” for the magistrates on Mexico’s Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, who “are clearly subservient to that ideology of death.”

Julia Regina de Cardenal, president of the Yes to Life Foundation of El Salvador, stressed that if Roe v. Wade were overturned “it would help El Salvador, in the sense that the arguments and lies that were used in the United States to legalize abortion, and that are still used here by those promoting the abortion industry, would be undercut.”

Although one would expect “more pressure from International Planned Parenthood Federation, in a desperate attempt to legalize its lucrative business that would be greatly affected,” the president of the Yes to Life Foundation emphasized that with a pro-life ruling by the United States Supreme Court “the humanity of the 15-week fetus would become more evident, which has already been demonstrated by science and technology.”

Ligia Briz, executive director of the The Family Matters Association of Guatemala, said that reversing Roe v. Wade “would be excellent news for us.”

“The organizations that are trying to push this issue in our countries, going against our legislation, especially in Guatemala, by law they will have to cease and desist,” she said.

Giuliana Caccia, director of the Origen Association in Peru, said that reversing Roe v. Wade “would be a clear example of an indisputable premise, which is that the truth always triumphs.”

“In Peru, I think that, if it were reversed, it would give us an indisputable argument, because this ruling was always invoked. Abortion has no legal basis, and no ruling or law can deny that it is a duty to defend life from conception, under any circumstance,” she said.

“Our country is one of the nations that has resisted the most, because abortion is legal in Argentina and in many countries in the region. The reversal of the ruling would be one more weapon to continue containing the advancement of this regional agenda that is making steady progress through NGOs financed by international collaboration,” she said.

The president of the More Life Foundation of Argentina, Raúl Magnasco, told ACI Prensa that “the possibility of reversing” Roe v. Wade “means for the whole world a very important ray of hope.”

“As the United States is the most influential country in terms of the communications media, it would mean great progress for the entire region and the world, which would understand, in light of the North American experience, that the future is inclusive regarding the care and recognition of both lives, the mother’s and the unborn child’s,” he stated.

Jesús Magaña, president of the United for Life platform in Colombia, stressed that the Roe v. Wade decision “has been disastrous not only for the United States but for the world,” because “abortion was legalized through a juridical act that ended up exceeding the functions of the Supreme Court, because it’s practically a kind of legislation contrary to the spirit of the Constitution, which protects human nature and the people as a whole.”

“In fact, in Colombia the model that has been used to decriminalize abortion has been precisely that of the United States, since the Constitutional Court, acting against the Constitution, has decriminalized abortion,” he said.

For Magaña, “if the ruling is reversed, it would be very important because it would put the Judiciary back within its just limits and the democratic process.”

Thus “this terrible imbalance” would be avoided “that we have today in our countries, where the interference of the judiciary is so aggressive that it ends up destroying the democratic system by invading the domains of the legislative or executive branch,” he said.

For Elizabeth Bunster, director of Project Hope in Chile, “the possibility of reversing Roe v. Wade would be a sign of hope in the face of a powerful onslaught against life in Latin America and the Caribbean.”

Although Chile’s Chamber of Deputies narrowly defeated a bill Nov. 30 that would have legalized elective abortion up to 14 weeks of pregnancy, “we know that there are groups that will continue to insist on this law,” she said.

If Roe v. Wade were reversed “it would represent great hope for Chile because one of the arguments wielded to legalize abortion is to talk about the progressivism of developed countries.”

“The United States is seen as a model for these issues,” she noted.

Also contributing to this article were Walter Sánchez Silva and Diego López Marina.