WATCH: CNN Leftist Nearly CRIES After Hearing about this Massive Conservative Victory

What’s the best part about conservative victories, particularly the high-profile ones that the left just can’t manage to ignore? The leftist tears that almost always accompany such victories.



Such is the case today, with the left in a state of utter panic over the idea that it might now be more difficult for them to kill babies, with Justice Alito having ruled in Dobbs that:

We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely—the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. That provision has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such right must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U. S. 702, 721 (1997) (internal quotation marks omitted).

The right to abortion does not fall within this category.

Jessica Schneider of CNN got incredibly depressed upon hearing that news, struggling to read out what happened without bursting into tears, as she was clearly on the verge of doing.

Watch that here:

Do you think trading Brittney Griner for the Russian arms dealer is a fair swap?*
This poll subscribes you to our premium network of content. Unsubscribe at any time.
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

As you can hear in the video, Ms. Schneider, when trying to fight back tears at the idea that now infants can’t be ripped apart in the womb, said:

Listen, it’s a heartbreaking betrayal of half of the country. I’m getting – watching the women there. It’s emotional. It’s a real problem. People are talking about privacy issues. Can state who is are trying to criminalize abortion not just to the women getting them but doctors providing them, people driving them to the clinic, are they going to be able to search your apps.

From there she got absolutely hysterical, imagining that the state governments are going to expend the resources necessary to create an authoritarian, ever-watching, anti-abortion state, acting like the result of this will be 1984 mixed with conservative values rather than just a few ruby red states banning abortion while blue states expand access to it. Speaking on that, she said:

There’s apps that track menstrual cycles. How far are the states going the try to go in criminalizing every single aspect of women trying to control their reproductive rights? We don’t know what the state will try to do. It’s going to be a patchwork and lead to laws where they try to really invade people’s privacy in unprecedented ways and those will have to be challenged and work their way through the court.

We’re talking about a period of chaos where women not only can’t be confident that they can get an abortion but can’t even be sure they have the right to track their own cycles. To control other parts of their reproductive processes in a way…

Continuing she then pointed out that the final opinion was about the same as the leaked opinion, which means that Alito and his four comrades didn’t back down or change their minds in the wake of the leak. Speaking on that, she said:



It looks almost identical to the leaked opinion including the phrase that Roe was egregiously wrong when it was decided. If this decision was egregiously wrong, more than a dozen Supreme Court justices since 1973 have said, it was actually quite right. This just gives you an idea of how different the five justices and the majority. The three justices plus Alito and Thomas from the other Republican appointees.

So break out the mugs and tumblers, because now’s a delicious time to slurp up some leftist tears, served up as usual with a healthy dose of hysterics.

By: Gen Z Conservative, editor of GenZConservative.com. Follow me on Facebook and Subscribe to My Email List

Notice: This article may contain commentary that reflects the author's opinion.