She mentioned a constitutional amendment procedure via Congress. That is not the only way Congress can act maine. Take a look at the Unborn victims of Violence Act from 2004. It acknowledged that the unborn child is human and afforded it basic human rights protections in all cases except abortion.
Did that require a constitutional amendment maine? Nope.
Speaking of Congress, see below. Why do you think this wasn't passed?
Congress has already had a golden opportunity to overturn
Roe v. Wade via Article III, Section 2. On February 10, 2005 Texas Congressman Ron Paul submitted H.R. 776, the Sanctity of Life Act of 2005. This bill, which would have prohibited the Supreme Court from hearing abortion cases, stated:
The Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any case arising out of any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, practice, or any part thereof, or arising out of any act interpreting, applying, enforcing, or effecting any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, or practice, on the grounds that such statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, practice, act, or part thereof:
(1) Protects the rights of human persons between conception and birth; or
(2) Prohibits, limits, or regulates —
(A) the performance of abortions; or
(B) the provision of public expense of funds, facilities, personnel, or other assistance for the performance of abortions.
The Sanctity of Life Act of 2005 was submitted near the beginning of the 109th Congress in plenty of time to pass. The Republicans were in the majority in both houses of Congress with 231 Republicans in the House and 55 Republicans in the Senate. Many of these Republicans were endorsed by pro-life groups. The Republican president was endorsed by numerous pro-life groups. Yet this bill never passed.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...congress-has-the-power-to-overturn-roe-v-wade
