I am always amazed that the pro-abortion types don’t slip up and tell the truth more often. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg just did. In an interview with the New York Times on Sotomayor Ginsburg opined that what she originally thought (read hoped) that Roe would result in Medicaid funded abortion.

Q: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?
JUSTICE GINSBURG: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae — in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong.

That is right. A sitting Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States just lamented that Roe did not mandate funding of abortion through medicaid in order to reduce “populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

Now can anyone point out any one particular population that is impacted by medicaid funded abortions? A population that we don’t want too many of?

A sitting Supreme Court Justice just lamented that Roe did force medicaid funding to control the number of undesirables in this country. From Margaret Sanger to Ginburg – the agenda of racist eugenics has not changed one bit. She should be impeached.

Thanks to Ed Whelan

Update from Ed at Hot Air:

And it wasn’t until 1980, which is when the Supreme Court decided McRae, that Ginsburg realized it didn’t have anything to do with allowing the government a mechanism to practice eugenics.
In that seven-year period, did Ginsburg use her considerable clout to argue against Roe, if that’s what she believed, or for that matter, against government funding of abortions? If not, shouldn’t we surmise from that silence that either (a) Ginsburg had few problems with government pushing a eugenics program, or (b) that she was willing to shrug off the eugenics in order to support Roe for the access to abortion?