In fact, the matter of abortion should be left to the smallest administrative units possible (e.g., townships) in recognition of the principle of subsidiarity, a principle that was very important to the Framers.

In fact, you've got it wrong. For one thing your view is the anti-federalist view, among whose espousers was James Madison.

The matter of abortion,like so many other issues of individual rights, is protected under Madison's elegant Ninth Amendment:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

In his concurring opinion in Griwold v. Connecticut, Justice goldberg wrote:

The language and history of the Ninth Amendment reveal that the Framers of the Constitution believed that there are additional fundamental rights, protected from governmental infringement, which exist alongside those fundamental rights specifically mentioned in the first eight constitutional amendments. ... It was proffered to quiet expressed fears that a bill of specifically enumerated rights could not be sufficiently broad to cover all essential rights, and that the specific mention of certain rights would be interpreted as a denial that others were protected.

In presenting the proposed Amendment, Madison said:

It has been objected also against a bill of rights that, by enumerating particular exceptions to the grant of power, it would disparage those rights which were not placed in that enumeration, and it might follow, by implication, that those rights which were not singled out were intended to be assigned into the hands of the General Government, and were consequently insecure. This is one of the most plausible arguments I have ever heard urged against the admission of a bill of rights into this system, but I conceive that it may be guarded against. I have attempted it, as gentlemen may see by turning to the last clause of the fourth resolution [the Ninth Amendment].
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0381_0479_ZC.html


I wonder if Scalia has read Madison's writings.

Schvitz