Woman Refuses Jury Duty Because Roe v. Wade Was Overturned, Could be Held In Contempt

The 1973 Roe V Wade decision was a landmark decision for women and reproductive rights in the country. Argued initially in front of the Supreme court in 1971, followed by a second argument in 1972, and then a third and final decision months later early in 1973, justices at the time ruled in favor of 7-2 that women are entitled to the Federal right to consult a registered physician who can prescribe an abortion if a woman's life is in danger.

On June 24, 2022, however, the US Supreme Court reversed the decision, leading to large-scale public outcry and horrifying stories highlighting examples of who the law was intended to protect, like a 10-year-old rape victim in Ohio who was forced to travel to Indiana in order to terminate a pregnancy that had progressed past six weeks.

TikToker @eatwithlys, whose account is primarily geared towards documenting the various meals and foods that she enjoys posted in a now-deleted TikTok her own form of protest against Roe v Wade being overturned: refusing to go to jury duty.

She cited "extreme emotional distress" over the decision's nullification which led to a litany of differing opinions, some of which she responded to, like the clip above where someone criticized her reasoning: "It's pathetic...truly...'Emotionally distressed' because you have to be responsible about you sex life? Please..."

The commenter's response is indicative of one argument that many supporters of the Roe v Wade decision being overturned offer as a justification of their stance: that people should practice sex more safely and that folks are running around having abortions like they're collecting Pokemon cards.

However, victims of domestic violence, and protecting the lives of women who cannot complete a pregnancy healthily are ones who will suffer the most after the Federal decision was overturned if they are living in a state that prohibits abortion under any circumstance.

@eatwithlys responded by listing various text overlays delineating what is at stake following the Supreme Court's June 2022 decision: "ROE V WADE IS SO MUCH MORE THAN THIS! It's about the constitutional right to privacy. It states that 'no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or process, without due process of law.'"

She continued: "Now that ROE V WADE has been overturned these are the rights that are at risk: 'The right to contraceptive and the right to procreate. The right to marry. The right to maintain family relationships. The right to make decisions about how to rear one's children. The right to intamacy. The right to PERSONAL control of medical treatment.'"

Ultimately, any rights associated with Roe v Wade are now decided on a more granular, state level, as abortion is no longer guarded as a Federal constitutional right.

Some have speculated that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is using his position of power in order to exact some type of revenge on President Joe Biden, who was heavily criticized for the way he handled Anita Hill's sexual harassment case against Thomas in 1991.

The senatorial committee, headed by Joe Biden, has been heavily scrutinized for the line of questioning they put forth in front of Hill, stating that they were tactless, sexist, and humiliating. Others have called Biden's line of questioning against Thomas and Hill "racist" and the President has since expressed regret for the way the case was handled, but said that he believed Hill at the time.

Even though @eatwithlys' original post was deleted, her secondary one received a variety of comments as well, with many folks sharing their own experiences of arguing for reinstating the Supreme Court's original Roe v Wade decision:

"Oh I got heated my dad said roe vs wade was right to be overturned and given to the states and I went off. I stated I didn’t even want these rights"

"How do they not understand that’s it not just about unwanted pregnancies, there are SO many other reasons why an abortion is necessary"

"Regardless of what Roe v Wade is actually about, it’s the principle of rights being stripped away one after another"