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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ITA. The leaker needs to be identified and disbarred. Not sure any actual laws were broken, but this cannot go unpunished.

To most Americans, the leaker is irrelevant. Sorry. Lawyer here.

The leaker is a hero.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can Congress legalize abortion in all states?

If they had the numbers in the Senate, yes.

But this Court would strike down such a law, so passing it would be of limited value. The only way to protect abortion rights from assault by the right would be a constitutional amendment, but the left is no where near having the numbers for that.

The democrats finding a backbone and expanding the court would do it too. The fact that they let trump get three justices shows how weak and ineffectual they are

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ITA. The leaker needs to be identified and disbarred. Not sure any actual laws were broken, but this cannot go unpunished.

To most Americans, the leaker is irrelevant. Sorry. Lawyer here.

Won't anyone think of the poor, privileged elites on the Supreme Court? Cue my tiny violin. I'm sorry, but this is likely the biggest consequence that they will ever have to face for their decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ITA. The leaker needs to be identified and disbarred. Not sure any actual laws were broken, but this cannot go unpunished.

To most Americans, the leaker is irrelevant. Sorry. Lawyer here.

The leaker is a hero.

How does the leaker change anything?

[Anonymous]

I am not a lawyer, so I want to make sure I understand the potential ramifications of this properly:

In addition to severely limiting/eliminating legal abortion in many states, this decision could set the precedent for overturning previous rulings that also used the right to privacy as their basis. That could include Loving (the right to interracial marriage), Griswald (right to purchase contraceptives without government restriction), Obergefell (right to same-sex marriage), etc. Since none of those rights are explicitly spelled out in the Constitution, under this ruling, they would be vulnerable.

Is that correct?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am not a lawyer, so I want to make sure I understand the potential ramifications of this properly:

In addition to severely limiting/eliminating legal abortion in many states, this decision could set the precedent for overturning previous rulings that also used the right to privacy as their basis. That could include Loving (the right to interracial marriage), Griswald (right to purchase contraceptives without government restriction), Obergefell (right to same-sex marriage), etc. Since none of those rights are explicitly spelled out in the Constitution, under this ruling, they would be vulnerable.

Is that correct?

That sounds correct to me. Isn't stare decisis kind of dead too? What would stop them from overturning the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or Voting Rights Act of 1965?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The consequences of overturning Roe vs. Wade:
-Huge long-term spike in teen pregnancy and unwed mothers
-Large increase in back-alley abortions and related deaths + permanent physical damage to the woman
-Big long-term increase in crime as kids of teen moms are more likely to end up committing crimes
-Huge number of deadbeat dads owing child support
-Lower rates of completion for high school and college
-Driving down wages for working class, while much higher wages for the professional and managerial class

This is going to have catastrophic effects on multiple generations of Americans and our society.


Further, is it any surprise that white Boomers got to enjoy legal abortion and birth control and then yank it away from younger generations? This is just the latest selfishness from that horrible generation.

Alllll ooofffff thhhiiisssss.

+1

In the same way that Trump fomented a coup, really whipped those dumb traitors into a frenzy on 1/6 in order to try and declare martial law (or, for the right wingers on this board who don’t know what that is, “Marshall law”), the flinty fascist element in the GOP is hoping to create absolute chaos in the US in order to continue to make things worse in the way that they want. They want slavery back, for one thing. You can see it in the way they still romanticize the centuries of slavery, and making people economically desperate is a good way to set that in place, as is their constant dehumanization of Black people.

But more immediately, they want sexual politics back where they were in the 1950s, with echoes of earlier. They want rape to be something women are just quiet about, with no messy naming names on social media. They want women to have cute jobs in the office a la Mad Men. Women are supposed to be sexual playthings for these beasts to control. The literal handmaiden wants it this way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ITA. The leaker needs to be identified and disbarred. Not sure any actual laws were broken, but this cannot go unpunished.

To most Americans, the leaker is irrelevant. Sorry. Lawyer here.

The leaker is a hero.

How does the leaker change anything?

If public response to the leak makes the GOP worry it will change the outcome of the mid-terms and potentially 2024, they/FedSoc will put tremendous pressure on the right wing justices to pare back the scope of the ruling and just uphold the Mississippi law without fully overturning Roe.

Roberts is already with the minority on this decision or it never would have been assigned to Alito. All we need is one more justice to get cold feet about going this far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ITA. The leaker needs to be identified and disbarred. Not sure any actual laws were broken, but this cannot go unpunished.

To most Americans, the leaker is irrelevant. Sorry. Lawyer here.

OH, the SCOTUS needs to Get OVER Itself , if it thinks it has ANY " Sanctity" when several of its Justices have Obviously been BOUGHT and Paid for

The LEAKER is a HERO to EVERY Woman alive in America

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not a lawyer, so I want to make sure I understand the potential ramifications of this properly:

In addition to severely limiting/eliminating legal abortion in many states, this decision could set the precedent for overturning previous rulings that also used the right to privacy as their basis. That could include Loving (the right to interracial marriage), Griswald (right to purchase contraceptives without government restriction), Obergefell (right to same-sex marriage), etc. Since none of those rights are explicitly spelled out in the Constitution, under this ruling, they would be vulnerable.

Is that correct?

That sounds correct to me. Isn't stare decisis kind of dead too? What would stop them from overturning the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or Voting Rights Act of 1965?

If they’re not respecting decisions, it’s open season.

Things are about to get heated. Congratulations, mOdErAteS. Was it worth it to take whatever propaganda the GOP fed you? Was it? Do you have any idea the can of worms your stupid protest votes has opened?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Conservatives run their little club like a crime syndicate rather than a political party.

If you're somehow alluding to how SCOTUS opinions are developed, revised, and voted upon, then you know nothing.

No, you know nothing. Republicans in this court are 100% part of the crime syndicate. Ginni probs had a round editing this opinion these f**ks are such scum

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ITA. The leaker needs to be identified and disbarred. Not sure any actual laws were broken, but this cannot go unpunished.

To most Americans, the leaker is irrelevant. Sorry. Lawyer here.

I totally disagree.
Those on the left will deem this person a hero, no doubt.
But it has done irreparable damage to SCOTUS and legal experts and those who are paying attention understand that.

I have no doubt the leaker will be identified.... maybe not publicly.... but he/she will be discovered. And, this person has destroyed his/her future in law.
However, this leaker may be able to get a gig on MSNBC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ITA. The leaker needs to be identified and disbarred. Not sure any actual laws were broken, but this cannot go unpunished.

To most Americans, the leaker is irrelevant. Sorry. Lawyer here.

The leaker is a hero.

How does the leaker change anything?

The leaker is irrelevant. Just a deflection from the actual issues.

The unethical and illegal actions of the justices.

The SCOTUS is illegitimate and broken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ITA. The leaker needs to be identified and disbarred. Not sure any actual laws were broken, but this cannot go unpunished.

To most Americans, the leaker is irrelevant. Sorry. Lawyer here.

The leaker is a hero.

How does the leaker change anything?

If public response to the leak makes the GOP worry it will change the outcome of the mid-terms and potentially 2024, they/FedSoc will put tremendous pressure on the right wing justices to pare back the scope of the ruling and just uphold the Mississippi law without fully overturning Roe.

Roberts is already with the minority on this decision or it never would have been assigned to Alito. All we need is one more justice to get cold feet about going this far.

I think this has woken the people. The GOP is dead. I’ve said for years it’s a zombie party, alive only due to the goofer dust of cheating, right wing propanganda and dark money. This will find it beat into pulp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not a lawyer, so I want to make sure I understand the potential ramifications of this properly:

In addition to severely limiting/eliminating legal abortion in many states, this decision could set the precedent for overturning previous rulings that also used the right to privacy as their basis. That could include Loving (the right to interracial marriage), Griswald (right to purchase contraceptives without government restriction), Obergefell (right to same-sex marriage), etc. Since none of those rights are explicitly spelled out in the Constitution, under this ruling, they would be vulnerable.

Is that correct?

That sounds correct to me. Isn't stare decisis kind of dead too? What would stop them from overturning the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or Voting Rights Act of 1965?

If they’re not respecting decisions, it’s open season.

Things are about to get heated. Congratulations, mOdErAteS. Was it worth it to take whatever propaganda the GOP fed you? Was it? Do you have any idea the can of worms your stupid protest votes has opened?

+1

We were destroyed by the stupidity of the rubes.