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

[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.

Free speech.

If I ever see Alito in person I will scream at him until his ears bleed.

Alito is now the new Hitler, the new Mussolini.

I will not have my liberty downgraded because he is a sexist pig.

I will not be willingly enslaved.

Just move to Maryland or DC. Problem solved.

Not if there's a nationwide ban.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Free speech.

If I ever see Alito in person I will scream at him until his ears bleed.

Alito is now the new Hitler, the new Mussolini.

I will not have my liberty downgraded because he is a sexist pig.

I will not be willingly enslaved.

Just move to Maryland or DC. Problem solved.

Not if there's a nationwide ban.

Very unlikely to happen. Abortion wasnt illegal throughout the US before RvW so it doesnt logically follow that it will be banned after.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The point is, both the US government and the US Constitution recognize "life" at birth.

The Constitution recognizes citizenship at birth. Not what you said.

Keep pretending a baby isn’t alive before he or she is born. You’re doing a fine job making pro-choice people look bad.

I am so tired of enraged incels trying to kill women for daring to have sex with anyone but them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Free speech.

If I ever see Alito in person I will scream at him until his ears bleed.

Alito is now the new Hitler, the new Mussolini.

I will not have my liberty downgraded because he is a sexist pig.

I will not be willingly enslaved.

Just move to Maryland or DC. Problem solved.

Not if there's a nationwide ban.

Very unlikely to happen. Abortion wasnt illegal throughout the US before RvW so it doesnt logically follow that it will be banned after.

Sure Jan

[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.

Some of you need to stop it with the argument that a social security number is the defining feature of when the government recognizes personhood. It’s wrong and gives cover to MAGA voters that want to pull rights from documented snd undocumented immigrants. Due Process in 15th applies to all persons. If you want to argue that personhood starts at birth, please do that argument instead. Some of us disagree and think that after viability, states should be able to balance the rights of the mother with a viable fetus which is why Roe/Casey was a good balance.

But the argument that those without a social security number is not recognized as life in the eyes of the government is just false.

+1. When people are immigrating to the US, it takes them a while to get SSNs. We cant just shoot them while they are waiting though.

Sorry. The Conservative members of this Court, and their supposed judicial philosophy, have repeatedly stated that non-citizens do not hold full rights. In fact, that whole area of law is likely another unenumerated right of the Constitution that's now been overturned. Under their own construction, non-citizens have limited, if any, rights. A fetus cannot ever become a citizen under the Constitution. Ergo, according to the previous opinions and judicial philosophy of Samuel Alito and Ginni Thomas' husband a fetus has no rights regardless.of whether it is a life or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Free speech.

If I ever see Alito in person I will scream at him until his ears bleed.

Alito is now the new Hitler, the new Mussolini.

I will not have my liberty downgraded because he is a sexist pig.

I will not be willingly enslaved.

Just move to Maryland or DC. Problem solved.

Not if there's a nationwide ban.

Very unlikely to happen. Abortion wasnt illegal throughout the US before RvW so it doesnt logically follow that it will be banned after.

Yeah because precedent and norms really matter to the GOP. /s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Free speech.

If I ever see Alito in person I will scream at him until his ears bleed.

Alito is now the new Hitler, the new Mussolini.

I will not have my liberty downgraded because he is a sexist pig.

I will not be willingly enslaved.

Just move to Maryland or DC. Problem solved.

"just"

Lets be honest. Anyone that worked up about this probably wouldnt live in Virginia when DC and Maryland are *right there.*

I feel the same as the PP and I live in VA. I also like my neighborhood and don’t want to live in MD or DC. I didn’t think that the state I live in would literally determine whether I have human rights or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Free speech.

If I ever see Alito in person I will scream at him until his ears bleed.

Alito is now the new Hitler, the new Mussolini.

I will not have my liberty downgraded because he is a sexist pig.

I will not be willingly enslaved.

Just move to Maryland or DC. Problem solved.

"just"

Lets be honest. Anyone that worked up about this probably wouldnt live in Virginia when DC and Maryland are *right there.*

I feel the same as the PP and I live in VA. I also like my neighborhood and don’t want to live in MD or DC. I didn’t think that the state I live in would literally determine whether I have human rights or not.

States have enormous power; in most cases, more power than the federal covernment. People evaluate school quality, leisure, etc when choosing a home, so it's puzzling to me when people dont factor in the politics of their state. DC, VA and MD are so close that in most people's case, there isnt massive difference. But VA has always been the most conservative choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Some of you need to stop it with the argument that a social security number is the defining feature of when the government recognizes personhood. It’s wrong and gives cover to MAGA voters that want to pull rights from documented snd undocumented immigrants. Due Process in 15th applies to all persons. If you want to argue that personhood starts at birth, please do that argument instead. Some of us disagree and think that after viability, states should be able to balance the rights of the mother with a viable fetus which is why Roe/Casey was a good balance.

But the argument that those without a social security number is not recognized as life in the eyes of the government is just false.

+1. When people are immigrating to the US, it takes them a while to get SSNs. We cant just shoot them while they are waiting though.

Sorry. The Conservative members of this Court, and their supposed judicial philosophy, have repeatedly stated that non-citizens do not hold full rights. In fact, that whole area of law is likely another unenumerated right of the Constitution that's now been overturned. Under their own construction, non-citizens have limited, if any, rights. A fetus cannot ever become a citizen under the Constitution. Ergo, according to the previous opinions and judicial philosophy of Samuel Alito and Ginni Thomas' husband a fetus has no rights regardless.of whether it is a life or not.

Are you saying it's okay to shoot immigrants? What is your end game with this argument? You can argue in favor of abortion rights without declaring open season on immigrants. Yeesh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Free speech.

If I ever see Alito in person I will scream at him until his ears bleed.

Alito is now the new Hitler, the new Mussolini.

I will not have my liberty downgraded because he is a sexist pig.

I will not be willingly enslaved.

Just move to Maryland or DC. Problem solved.

Not if there's a nationwide ban.

Very unlikely to happen. Abortion wasnt illegal throughout the US before RvW so it doesnt logically follow that it will be banned after.

Abortion wasn’t politicized before the way it is now. Sure Catholics opposed it but it wasn’t a core tenet of right wing ideology until later

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Free speech.

If I ever see Alito in person I will scream at him until his ears bleed.

Alito is now the new Hitler, the new Mussolini.

I will not have my liberty downgraded because he is a sexist pig.

I will not be willingly enslaved.

Just move to Maryland or DC. Problem solved.

Not if there's a nationwide ban.

Very unlikely to happen. Abortion wasnt illegal throughout the US before RvW so it doesnt logically follow that it will be banned after.

Abortion wasn’t politicized before the way it is now. Sure Catholics opposed it but it wasn’t a core tenet of right wing ideology until later

CNN has declared a national ban on abortion "all but impossible."

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/09/politics/mitch-mcconnell-national-abortion-ban-impossible-what-matters/index.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Some of you need to stop it with the argument that a social security number is the defining feature of when the government recognizes personhood. It’s wrong and gives cover to MAGA voters that want to pull rights from documented snd undocumented immigrants. Due Process in 15th applies to all persons. If you want to argue that personhood starts at birth, please do that argument instead. Some of us disagree and think that after viability, states should be able to balance the rights of the mother with a viable fetus which is why Roe/Casey was a good balance.

But the argument that those without a social security number is not recognized as life in the eyes of the government is just false.

+1. When people are immigrating to the US, it takes them a while to get SSNs. We cant just shoot them while they are waiting though.

Sorry. The Conservative members of this Court, and their supposed judicial philosophy, have repeatedly stated that non-citizens do not hold full rights. In fact, that whole area of law is likely another unenumerated right of the Constitution that's now been overturned. Under their own construction, non-citizens have limited, if any, rights. A fetus cannot ever become a citizen under the Constitution. Ergo, according to the previous opinions and judicial philosophy of Samuel Alito and Ginni Thomas' husband a fetus has no rights regardless.of whether it is a life or not.

Are you saying it's okay to shoot immigrants? What is your end game with this argument? You can argue in favor of abortion rights without declaring open season on immigrants. Yeesh.

I am doing neither. For decades the right wibg has complained about "judicial activists". Has said that strict constructionism is the only acceptable judicial philosophy. That
nothing not explicitly said in the Constitution doesn't matter. This is their argument. This is what they claimed was being oppressed. This is their consistency.

The vast majority of people believe that Casey's viability test on top of Roe's right to privacy is the propert standard. The vast majority also thinks that immigrants have rights. That is how the law was. The law, assuming the draft stands, has changed. There is no benefit in sugarcoating their logic. It's a greenlight for anything government does to be legal starting in 2024.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The point is, both the US government and the US Constitution recognize "life" at birth.

The Constitution recognizes citizenship at birth. Not what you said.

Keep pretending a baby isn’t alive before he or she is born. You’re doing a fine job making pro-choice people look bad.

You have it backwards. You inability to let people live their lives as they see fit, imposing YOUR religious beliefs on to others is unconstitutiuonal. You need to own your tyranny for what it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Free speech.

If I ever see Alito in person I will scream at him until his ears bleed.

Alito is now the new Hitler, the new Mussolini.

I will not have my liberty downgraded because he is a sexist pig.

I will not be willingly enslaved.

Just move to Maryland or DC. Problem solved.

Not if there's a nationwide ban.

Very unlikely to happen. Abortion wasnt illegal throughout the US before RvW so it doesnt logically follow that it will be banned after.

Mitch McConnell has already disclosed that is the GOP plan should it take the House and Senate, along with the White House in 2025. And...I am sure they will kill the filibuster to make it happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Free speech.

If I ever see Alito in person I will scream at him until his ears bleed.

Alito is now the new Hitler, the new Mussolini.

I will not have my liberty downgraded because he is a sexist pig.

I will not be willingly enslaved.

Just move to Maryland or DC. Problem solved.

Not if there's a nationwide ban.

Very unlikely to happen. Abortion wasnt illegal throughout the US before RvW so it doesnt logically follow that it will be banned after.

Abortion wasn’t politicized before the way it is now. Sure Catholics opposed it but it wasn’t a core tenet of right wing ideology until later

Pre-1980's Catholics practiced what they preached. They also didn't impose their religion on to others the way the Evangelicals are now.