“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:YLS may want to start rethinking their admissions policy. The thread below is insane. Hard to believe these people are future lawyers.

Yes, it’s disgusting that so many misogynists work in our legal system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fetuses are not "potential life", they are a separate living human being, scientifically speaking.

If they’ve never been alive outside the womb, they’re potential life. Under the law (which is what we’re discussing) babies aren’t granted the status of living person until they’re born alive. Besides, this draft opinion is not grounded in science.

Under which law(s)? You’re making stuff up now. They may not be citizens or registered persons, but doubtful there is a law that defines life. If there were a law, rulings like RvW wouldn’t be necessary. That’s the crux of the issue. Pass a law that clearly defines human life and what may be done legally “by others” to that human life at its various stages. Fetus, baby, toddler, teen, adult, senior, invalid, death bed patient, comatose patients, death row inmate, etc. then we can all stop being hypocrites.

Can a fetus get a social security number?
Is a man responsible for fetus support?

No?

Then it isn't a life in the eyes of the government.

When I have life growing inside me, I don't let a social security number determine if it's a baby or not.

Good for you. I'm not telling you how to feel about your pregnancy so stop telling other women how to feel about theirs

+1

And I’m not going to force my religious belief on others. Because I’m not an a-hole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:15 weeks
No restrictions
No waiting
Easy access
Affordable
After 15 weeks - rape/incest/life of mother or fetus
Dr. is given broad discretion to use best medical practices.

I’m hard core pro-choice and could live with this
But this country has a long way to go to get abortion access to women everywhere. Later abortions are happening because of all the roadblocks republicans have erected.

I’d also like to see verbiage for free birth control and better sex education. I had excellent sex education growing up and I think it really made a difference.

I live in California and this would be more restrictive than what we currently have. If you've never had genetic testing come back at 20w and scrambled to get your MFM appointment before the abortion cut off in your state so that you would have options, please don't negotiate away the rest of our rights.

I would not support any bill that was more restrictive than Roe and that removed discretion for states. The WHPA is a good compromise...but people want Democrats to start off with a bill that their base doesn't support. No thank you.

Baseline, not a ceiling. I was just suggesting a bill that might actually pass. That’s all.
I agree 20 weeks is better.

Also: most people don’t understand what Roe even means. Democrats need to educate the public. The forced birthers have been lying for 40
Years. People now believe the lies.

15 weeks isn't any more likely to get 60 votes than 20 weeks, viability, or 40 weeks. None of them can ge 60 in the Senate. Meanwhile if 15 weeks is proposed then that becomes the new baseline negotiating position.

Find the 8 extra Senators that are willing to pass anything first. There's currently only 51 + Manchin potentially interested in anything.

Exactly. 15 weeks is just some arbitrary line. Stick with viability.

That is the gestational age where a fetus can feel pain. Science and all that.

JFC you people with your never ending stream of bullsh!t. Also, the electric signals that the ultrasound picks up at six weeks are not a “heartbeat,” since an embryo at that stage doesn’t have a fully formed heart.

Ok, so when do you think a fetus can feel pain?

They don't want to answer that question. They respond by deflecting or denying.

It has no brain and is not sentient. So who cares?

At some point before birth it has a brain, no? I’m pro-choice but would not be opposed to a heightened standard of some sort after the point that pain can be felt. To the PP that said if it’s not in my body, it’s not my business, how would you feel about a newborn being murdered. It’s not in your house, so it’s not your business right? I think those of you who won’t even acknowledge that there might be pain to a late term fetus that must be dismembered to be aborted are just as bad as those on the other extreme end of the spectrum.

Which late-term fetuses are being aborted? The ones without brains? The ones with devastating (painful) defects?

https://www.npr.org/2006/02/21/5168163/partial-birth-abortion-separating-fact-from-spin

This article (though a bit old) was a fact checking article by NPR on “partial birth” abortions. This quote implies that all such abortions are not only performed on severely defective fetuses:

“Under what health circumstances are D&X abortions performed?

There is currently no statistical information available on why "dilation and extraction" abortions are performed.

In a widely-publicized interview with The New York Times in 1997, Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, estimated that in the majority of cases, the procedure is performed on a healthy mother and healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along in development.”

If anyone has more recent information that contradicts this, I would be very interested in seeing it.

D&E is 2nd trimester, not “late term”.

D&E refers to dilation and evacuation. The quote above is talking about dilation and extraction (also known as partial birth abortion).

“Partial birth” isn’t a thing.

And 2nd trimester isn’t “late term”.

Did you read the linked NPR article? The fetus is in fact partially delivered and it’s not limited to 2nd trimester.

“Two abortion physicians, one in Ohio and one in California, independently developed variations on the method by extracting the fetus intact. The Ohio physician, Martin Haskell, called his method "dilation and extraction," or D&X. It involved dilating the woman's cervix, then pulling the fetus through it feet first until only the head remained inside. Using scissors or another sharp instrument, the head was then punctured, and the skull compressed, so it, too, could fit through the dilated cervix.”

I’m not even saying this should be completely banned. But it doesn’t help the pro-choice movement to sugarcoat facts.

“Partial birth” is RWNJ propaganda, not a medical term.

And it’s not used in the 3rd trimester. It’s not used for “late-term abortions”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hi those who support right to an abortion, Please STOP with the cutoff/viability discussion. We don’t need to get stuck in the anti-abortion rhetoric. A ban on 15 weeks only leads to a ban on 12 weeks, then 6, then none but w/ exceptions, then nothing.

For those how have lost the the plot, Alito is saying that pregnant people don’t deserve the FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT to privacy.

Exactly. Other people’s religion doesn’t need to dictate ANY of medical care. That is a decision for me and my doctor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:YLS may want to start rethinking their admissions policy. The thread below is insane. Hard to believe these people are future lawyers.

People who don’t respect human rights are often find it hard to believe others do.

I will agree that these law students do not respect human rights or the right to free speech. Very scary what we have coming up through law schools right now.

Yoyu don't seem to understand the repurcussion of this ruling, and then when you put it in context of Bush and Trump appointing the judges making these decisions when they themselves didn't vary the majority of voters, well you can see why it might be unpopular and worth agitation over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just curious........

If a pregnant woman is murdered, the majority of states will charge the criminal with TWO homicides.

The majority of states have fetal homicide laws.

If the unborn has no rights, why is this the case?

https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

Some of these laws were passed by forced birthers to lay the foundation for people like you to one day undermine abortion rights...

Why don't you share what happens during an abortion. Stick to facts.

you don't seem to get it. we don't care...we want to make choices over our body ourselves

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just curious........

If a pregnant woman is murdered, the majority of states will charge the criminal with TWO homicides.

The majority of states have fetal homicide laws.

If the unborn has no rights, why is this the case?

https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

Some of these laws were passed by forced birthers to lay the foundation for people like you to one day undermine abortion rights...

Why don't you share what happens during an abortion. Stick to facts.

you don't seem to get it. we don't care...we want to make choices over our body ourselves

No, you don’t seem to get it. The decision is not just about your body.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just curious........

If a pregnant woman is murdered, the majority of states will charge the criminal with TWO homicides.

The majority of states have fetal homicide laws.

If the unborn has no rights, why is this the case?

https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

Some of these laws were passed by forced birthers to lay the foundation for people like you to one day undermine abortion rights...

Why don't you share what happens during an abortion. Stick to facts.

you don't seem to get it. we don't care...we want to make choices over our body ourselves

No, you don’t seem to get it. The decision is not just about your body.

Yes, it is. If you have a different opinion that is fine, but you don't get to shove your opinion down my throat.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Con law/civil rights practitioners: can you all weigh in on this argument? Very intriguing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just curious........

If a pregnant woman is murdered, the majority of states will charge the criminal with TWO homicides.

The majority of states have fetal homicide laws.

If the unborn has no rights, why is this the case?

https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

Some of these laws were passed by forced birthers to lay the foundation for people like you to one day undermine abortion rights...

Why don't you share what happens during an abortion. Stick to facts.

you don't seem to get it. we don't care...we want to make choices over our body ourselves

No, you don’t seem to get it. The decision is not just about your body.

It should be. Because her body is the one being used and put in potential danger.

[Anonymous]

Exactly right.

If the question of abortion's legality is not something that should be decided at the federal level and should go back to the states for each to determine, why shouldn't it go instead to counties? Or cities? Or individual households?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just curious........

If a pregnant woman is murdered, the majority of states will charge the criminal with TWO homicides.

The majority of states have fetal homicide laws.

If the unborn has no rights, why is this the case?

https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

Some of these laws were passed by forced birthers to lay the foundation for people like you to one day undermine abortion rights...

Why don't you share what happens during an abortion. Stick to facts.

you don't seem to get it. we don't care...we want to make choices over our body ourselves

We get that a growing baby doesn't matter to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Exactly right.

If the question of abortion's legality is not something that should be decided at the federal level and should go back to the states for each to determine, why shouldn't it go instead to counties? Or cities? Or individual households?

But they aren’t saying it can’t be decided by federal law. They are opening abortion restrictions to federal and state law. They are saying the Constitution gives no protection to women against state or federal laws.

[Anonymous]

Prevent not terminate