This is just so completely, utterly wrong:
Mexico City’s legalization of first trimester abortions—carried out by a legislature, not a court—should serve as an instructive reminder of how things might have been in the United States had the Supreme Court not intervened in 1973. Supporters of the Mexico City legislation say they hope Mexico’s states will follow suit with their own liberal abortion laws. It’s safe to predict that five years from now, despite the Church’s vigorous opposition, that is exactly what will happen.
So here’s a thought experiment: Imagine Roe v. Wade never took place. The United States would be on Mexico’s abortion trajectory, just 40 years earlier. As the National Abortion Federation explains, “[b]etween 1967 and 1973, two-thirds of the states liberalized or repealed their criminal abortion laws.” First and even second trimester abortions would probably have been legal in most U.S. states by 1980.
Just what did Roe accomplish, then? Well, by circumventing what would have been a gradual and temperate evolution of abortion policy, buttressed by democratic consensus, the decision begot a politicized Christianity, the Right’s fixation with social issues at the expense of policy, and decades of public acrimony. Your mileage may vary, but I think it’s a shame that Mexico’s example came too late.
I would go on a lengthy tirade about how totally wrongheaded this is (“Ladies, would you mind forgetting about your rights for a decade or more so that we can avoid acrimony? I mean, don’t you hate acrimony?”) but instead I’ll let vintage Scott Lemieux do it for me.