May 3, 20223 yr 12 hours ago, vikas83 said: Putting aside one’s stance on the issue, we should all agree that it is egregious and dangerous that this was leaked. Draft opinions should remain private and debated among the justices. Not every case ends up in-line with the initial vote. This being public undermines the process. How many of the people that liked this are now saying the leak doesn't matter? "It's not a big deal" It's huge that this was leaked
May 3, 20223 yr 8 minutes ago, Kz! said: "Good with"... no, you said it was a huge win for the left. It really bothers you when I point out the times when the right F's up. I hate to burst your bubble, but this is definitely one of those times.
May 3, 20223 yr Just now, VanHammersly said: It really bothers you when I point out the times when the right F's up. I hate to burst your bubble, but this is definitely one of those times. I know, the right is still reeling from Musk's purchase. We may not ever recover.
May 3, 20223 yr 30 minutes ago, toolg said: POTUS statement: On the third point... It feels like Democrats want to keep abortion a wedge issue to garner votes for their candidates. Elect a pro-choice Democrat... who then does nothing to support the issue until it's too late.
May 3, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, toolg said: On the third point... It feels like Democrats want to keep abortion a wedge issue to garner votes for their candidates. Elect a pro-choice Democrat... who then does nothing to support the issue until it's too late. Does nothing? Abortion is about to be legal in every state that's run by Dems and illegal in every state that's run by Republicans.
May 3, 20223 yr 4 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: Does nothing? Abortion is about to be legal in every state that's run by Dems and illegal in every state that's run by Republicans. Very end is nigh
May 3, 20223 yr So after doing a little more research, I think where I come down is as follows: 1. The Court went too far in Roe -- applying the Right to Privacy to the decision to terminate a pregnancy...that seems like a stretch. The Court seemed to want to shy away from simply declaring that a fetus has no rights, and therefore abortion shouldn't be deemed illegal. Instead they waded into the muck by getting into viability. I would have simply focused on whether Constitutional Rights (the right to life) apply to a fetus, which they desperately sought to avoid. It was a cutely crafted opinion to get the outcome they wanted without attacking the fundamental issue. So, I think it was a poor decision. 2. That being said, I don't see the need to overturn precedent that has stood for 5 decades. Overturning precedent should be reserved for truly egregious decisions like Plessey v. Ferguson. I don't see how Roe falls into that category. Roe and Casey set a framework that I see no reason to overturn, even if the original decision was flawed. 3. Passing a federal ban on abortion is way too far and should be overturned by SCOTUS if they have any intellectual credibility. Clearly, they are saying that abortion falls under the 10th amendment. So leave it there. Also, any state law that tries to punish a resident from going to a place where abortion is legal to terminate should be seen as unconstitutional. 4. There's probably nothing that can change this. Democrats can't get a bill to legalize abortion nationally through the Senate, and it would likely be overturned by this SCOTUS anyway. If they were going to codify this into law, it needed to happen when they had the votes and Roe was precedent.
May 3, 20223 yr 10 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: Does nothing? Abortion is about to be legal in every state that's run by Dems and illegal in every state that's run by Republicans. *Nothing on the Federal level. You are correct. The result of this will be there are 50 different sets of rules depending on which state you live in.
May 3, 20223 yr 53 minutes ago, Kz! said: Interesting opinion, Paul. Wouldn't have guessed. Without mentioning Trump and/or Republicans, what do you find attractive about dem policies? Genuinely curious. That's a loaded question. I've voted Republican in past presidential elections so I'm not a "straight blue" voter. It has always depended on the candidate for me.
May 3, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, Paul852 said: That's a loaded question. I've voted Republican in past presidential elections so I'm not a "straight blue" voter. It has always depended on the candidate for me. From Kz? No way.
May 3, 20223 yr To try and use a bad comparison, I liken this to cannabis. Should the federal government ban cannabis? Absolutely not, and I'd argue that the current law is unconstitutional. However, should the state of Mississippi be allowed to ban cannabis? That's a much more difficult argument. The equal protection argument would be that citizens of Mississippi are being treated differently than those in California, but the 14th amendment applies to treatment by the Federal government. So while I would think state laws banning the use of cannabis are stupid, I wouldn't argue they are unconstitutional.
May 3, 20223 yr 54 minutes ago, The_Omega said: I haven’t seen a biological male this emotional since Adam Morrison in the NCAA Tournament. And nothings even been announced yet. Gear down sport, you and whatever unfortunate girl that you guilt in to sleeping with you will still be allowed to kill the innocent result of your actions. That's a hell of a reference.
May 3, 20223 yr 45 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said: My lawyer friend was saying last night that this is first time SCOTUS has taken away right. I couldn't really think of another example, either. They've either expanded rights or denied their extension but never outright annulled one that I can think of. There is no "right” to abortion. It literally does not exist anywhere in the constitution. If you want to make abortion a right, there is an amendment process in the constitution. That is how rights are codified into law.
May 3, 20223 yr Author 5 minutes ago, TEW said: There is no "right” to abortion. It literally does not exist anywhere in the constitution. If you want to make abortion a right, there is an amendment process in the constitution. That is how rights are codified into law. You're essentially arguing semantics. The Court recognized an implied right to abortion in Roe, which legalized abortion nationwide. To the extent that it was legally acknowledged, the right existed by dint of the Court's imprimatur. It now appears primed to rescind a right that at the very least existed in practice for nearly 50 years.
May 3, 20223 yr Strong accusation from McConnell. He better have some proof before making such a statement. Because today it seems more likely a conservative clerk leaked Alito's opinion.
May 3, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, toolg said: Strong accusation from McConnell. He better have some proof before making such a statement. Because today it seems more likely a conservative clerk leaked Alito's opinion. Why? Have we not learned that there are no repercussions for this type of stuff anymore?
May 3, 20223 yr Just now, EaglesRocker97 said: You're essentially arguing semantics. The Court recognized an implied right to abortion in Roe, which legalized abortion nationwide. They now appear primed to rescind it. And SCOTUS now seems like it will not recognize that non-existent right because it is not in the constitution and thus does not exist. The key here is that SCOTUS does not give rights. It was not a right to give, and thus is not being "taken away.” If you want something to be a right, it needs to go through the amendment process. Yes, it is inconvenient. Yes, it is difficult. Yes, you probably cannot get it done politically in the case of abortion. This is by design. Amendments should be difficult and have broad support.
May 3, 20223 yr 4 minutes ago, toolg said: Thread about the workings inside SCOTUS, for those concerned about the leak: Referring to the opinion as "monstrous" torpedoes any credibility she may have had. Investigate the leak immediately.
May 3, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, vikas83 said: Referring to the opinion as "monstrous" torpedoes any credibility she may have had. Investigate the leak immediately. I'm about to eat lunch, but I'll be sure to get on it right after.
May 3, 20223 yr Just now, Kz! said: I'm about to eat lunch, but I'll be sure to get on it right after. I meant someone competent. You go ahead and enjoy that White Castle at your leisure.
May 3, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, vikas83 said: I meant someone competent. You go ahead and enjoy that White Castle at your leisure. I'm here for the insult but please don't slander White Castle.
Create an account or sign in to comment