Steve Corbin is Professor Emeritus of Marketing at the University of Northern Iowa.
It has been a year since the Supreme Court stripped women of their nearly 50 year right to make their own reproductive health-care decisions in the overturning of Roe v. Wade. SCOTUS’ Dobbs v. Jackson decision has created a ripple effect, catching many people by surprise:
1) For the first time ever, a majority of Americans say abortion is morally acceptable and recent abortion laws are too strict.
2) For the first time in two decades, more people identify as pro-choice than pro-life.
3) For the first time in 49 years, “The Dobbs decision transferred all-or-nothing disputes to the states” (Wall Street Journal), an undue burden on state supreme courts.
4) A recent NBC News poll found voters who oppose the court’s actions include 55 percent of men, 67 percent of women, 66 percent of suburban women, 77 percent of female voters ages 18-49, 92 percent of Democrats, 60 percent of independents and 31 percent of Republicans.
5) A March17 - May 18 Kaiser Family Foundation survey of 569 OBGYN doctors revealed shocking findings: “68 percent found the [Dobbs] ruling has worsened their ability to manage pregnancy-related emergencies, [and] has worsened pregnancy-related mortality (64 percent), racial and ethnic inequities in maternal health (70 percent) and the ability to attract new OBGYNs to the field (55 percent).”
6) Michele Goodwin, a legal expert in bioethics and health law, notes “A dramatic proliferation in anti-abortion legislation in the United States has coincided with this nation becoming the deadliest in the `developed world’ to be pregnant and attempt to give birth” (Ms., May 24, 2022).
7) Black women are 3.5 times more likely to die due to maternal mortality than their white counterparts, unabated by abortion bans.
8) The states with the highest maternal mortality rates also lead the nation in anti-abortion legislation.
9) Isabella Oishi, Georgetown Law student, writes that since the Texas Heartbeat Act (SB 8) became law, it did not reduce the need for abortion care. Rather, there has been an 11-fold increase in Texans crossing state lines for abortions.
10) Oishi further reveals that states prohibiting women to seek abortions in other states is “likely unconstitutional based on the right to travel, the Privileges and Immunities Clause and the Dormant Commerce Clause. The anti abortion legislation harkens back to the (1793) Fugitive Slave Act.”
11) Federal judge, Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, announced a constitutional right to abortion may be found in the 13th Amendment, ratified at the end of the Civil War in 1865 -- made slavery and involuntary servitude illegal. This is an area that was ignored by the Supreme Court (National Review).
12) Andrew Koppelman, author of “Forced Labor: A Thirteenth Amendment Defense of Abortion,” writes “forced pregnancy’s violation of personal liberty is obvious. Restrictions on abortion also violate the [13th] amendment’s guarantee of equality, because forcing women to be mothers makes them into a servant caste, a group that, by virtue of a status of birth, is held subject to a special duty to serve others and not themselves” (National Review).
13) Elie Mystal, a legal scholar, wrote in the March 2022 issue of The Nation: “these [anti-abortion] states are borrowing traces of the sadistic logic and psychological tactics of this country’s enslavers.” As recently as June 29, Ja’han Jones, a research-based author, concurred with Mystal by noting “with abortion rights being rescinded across the country, it’s more important than ever that we call restrictions on this vital procedure what they actually are: slavery.”
The issues of pro-choice vs. pro-life, awareness of the 13th Amendment’s slavery and involuntary servitude prohibition, OBGYN doctor concerns, morality and maternal mortality have come center stage to voters and the 2024 election. GOP candidates will – most likely -- purposely ignore these multitude of findings while Democrats will tout women’s reproductive rights.
SCOTUS’s 6-3 decision created this unnecessary chaos for 334 million Americans.
Disclosures:
Steve is a non-paid freelance opinion editor and guest columnist contributor (circa 2013) to 172 newspapers in 32 states who receives no remuneration, funding or endorsement from any for-profit business, not-for-profit organization, political action committee or political party
A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.