Are they going after Obergefell v. Hodges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Obama got 2 justices, Trump got 3, Biden will be lucky to get 2. McConnell is a much better politician than Schumer and RBG thought she was more indispensable.

Playing Cslvinball doesn’t make you a much better politician. It shows that you’re unprincipled and care only about the financial interests of the billionaire donor class and wielding power regardless of what the voters think. McConnell ultimately wanted a Court that would gut the modern regulatory state as we know it. Abortion was a wedge issue that provided a means to an end. Do you think the Kochs really care about the “unborn”? Don’t be naive. The evangelicals were little more than useful idiots.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

In which some “top conservative legal minds” rank the worst SCOTUS decisions ever.

[Anonymous]

I guess not liking Dred Scott or Plessy is good, right?

I bet their reasoning is insane, but those are generally regarded as the most wrongly decided cases ever

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess not liking Dred Scott or Plessy is good, right?

I bet their reasoning is insane, but those are generally regarded as the most wrongly decided cases ever

Dredd scott is in line with thinking of the times. The first congress already established that only free (not indentured) whites could be citizens. Afterall, it took an amendment to the constitution to render it otherwise, and an act of congress to extend citizenship to Native americans.

As for plessy, modern sensibilities appear to prefer separate spaces for POC upon which white bodies can not intrude, though this is a distinct fact pattern upon which the contrapositive was what Plessy vs Fergueson established on the national stage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In which some “top conservative legal minds” rank the worst SCOTUS decisions ever.

Um... we're supposed to care what a far-left podcast has to say? One that has *always* hated SCOTUS? Please.

But for Hamam and her fellow podcast hosts — Michael Liroff and Peter, who asked to be identified only by his first name because his employer is unaware of the podcast — hating the high court is nothing new. In fact, it’s something of a calling. On “5-4,” a show “about how much the Supreme Court sucks,” as announced in its tagline, they’ve spent more than two years and nearly 150 episodes mordantly enumerating what they argue are its many sins and weaknesses.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/25/arts/5-4-supreme-court-podcast.html

[Anonymous]

Hey look it’s a state that’s not recognizing gay marriage. The judge just awarded parental rights to the sperm donor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey look it’s a state that’s not recognizing gay marriage. The judge just awarded parental rights to the sperm donor.

This is just insane. I can’t believe this is happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey look it’s a state that’s not recognizing gay marriage. The judge just awarded parental rights to the sperm donor.

This is just insane. I can’t believe this is happening.

Yes you can. The Republican Party has been crystal clear about where they’re going.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey look it’s a state that’s not recognizing gay marriage. The judge just awarded parental rights to the sperm donor.

This is just insane. I can’t believe this is happening.

Even more despicable that it was done on Valentine’s Day

[Anonymous]

I would this would apply to all couples who used donor eggs or sperm, not just same sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would this would apply to all couples who used donor eggs or sperm, not just same sex.

It SHOULD apply that way. In practice, this type of discrimination is only ever targeted at LGBTQ+ people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would this would apply to all couples who used donor eggs or sperm, not just same sex.

It SHOULD apply that way. In practice, this type of discrimination is only ever targeted at LGBTQ+ people.

I think if the fascists continue to have their way, straight single women who opted to enter parenthood alone will also be targeted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey look it’s a state that’s not recognizing gay marriage. The judge just awarded parental rights to the sperm donor.

This is just insane. I can’t believe this is happening.

Why? Republicans aren't coy about their beliefs. They are very upfront and they constantly push. This should surprise precisely no one

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would this would apply to all couples who used donor eggs or sperm, not just same sex.

It SHOULD apply that way. In practice, this type of discrimination is only ever targeted at LGBTQ+ people.

I think if the fascists continue to have their way, straight single women who opted to enter parenthood alone will also be targeted.

Oh I agree with this 100%. Look at Trump’s speech. It was almost entirely against trans people but he mentioned bringing back “the nuclear family”. We all know what they mean with that.