Tipsheet
Premium

These Mainstream Media Outlets Are Freaking Out Over Dobbs Abortion Case

Rebecca Downs
Rebecca Downs  |  December 04, 2021 9:00 PM

With people actually being able to tune in to hear and read the transcript for oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, both sides are well aware that the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade may very well be overturned or at least weakened. And the pro-abortion crowd is really, truly freaking out.

This hysterical hand-wringing came especially from the media.

Spencer covered how CNN's legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin referred to the oral arguments as "a wall-to-wall disaster."

Toobin restricted his replies to the above tweet, but quoted tweets, like the one below, call to mind that he not only supports abortion, he tried to bribe Casey Greenfield to get an abortion when she became pregnant during an affair they had when Toobin was married at the time. 

It wasn't just Toobin, though. CNN tweeted an article by Ariana de Vogue with the headline, "Supreme Court's conservatives lean toward limiting abortion rights after dramatic oral arguments on Mississippi law banning abortions after 15 weeks."

Recommended

Blinken In Deep Water After State Dept. Hosts Therapy Sessions Post-Trump Win Sarah Arnold
These Democratic Senators Could Sure Be in Trouble After Voting for Sanders' Anti-Israel Resolutions Rebecca Downs

On Thursday morning, the outlet also published an opinion piece from Mary Ziegler, who warned that the "Supreme Court seems ready to launch a social and political earthquake." 

A "BREAKING NEWS" tweet from The New York Times declared that the "Supreme Court seems poised to uphold Mississippi's law." It directed readers to a series of live updates from the outlet. 

The Washington Post tweeted out Robert Barnes' article that the "Supreme Court seems inclined to uphold Mississippi abortion law that would undermine Roe v. Wade."

The Hill tweeted and sent out a "news alert" that linked to John Kruzel's article, offering that the "Supreme Court seems poised to consider new limits on right to abortion."

It got worse from there, especially when it came to some of the opinion pieces published by the mainstream media outlets. 

As Landon highlighted earlier on Saturday, pro-lifers felt forced to address a guest opinion essay by Elizabeth Spiers, "I Was Adopted. I Know the Trauma It Can Inflict."

The New York Times and Washington Post were also less than keen on taking pro-life submissions to do with Dobbs once oral arguments had taken place, as highlighted by Jeryl Bier of Pluribus. 

Since then, The New York Times has published even more guest opinion essays on the issue, ten as of Saturday night, including Spiers' piece, with many of them with a strong pro-abortion focus. 

The Washington Post published more as well, though, to their credit, this included a pro-life piece from Megan McArdle that explained, "Overruling 'Roe' likely wouldn't generate the female backlash that feminists expect."

The pro-life movement can at least be encouraged by such a reaction, especially when it comes to such tweets as this one from Vox's Senior Deputy Editor of Politics and Policy Caroline Houck, who linked to Ian Millhiser's piece, "It sure sounds like Roe v. Wade is doomed."

A decision is expected sometime in late June, as the Court usually saves its abortion decisions and other hot item cases for last.