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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

..we don't care about the leak. We care about the opinion.

You mean a draft opinion that is part of a lengthy deliberatively process within the Court before a final opinion is ultimately voted on and released? You mean that draft opinion?

Yes. That opinion. (Why do you think your overstatement is helpful? Who do you think it is helpful for?)

For emotionally-charged people like you who are inappropriately drawing sweeping conclusions without proper context or the facts.

Hon. [sweeps at the thousands of forced birth laws enacted in the last ten years] HON.

It is YOU who lacks context and facts. What you’re doing is gaslighting us. Or maybe yourself. But you’re not the level headed, above the fray thinker you think you are; you’re just pig ignorant.

Keep up the unfounded rhetoric and name calling. You're simply proving the point made above.

It’s not unfounded rhetoric. You just literally have no idea what you’re talking about. You’re out of your league, son.

And I didn’t call you names. I made a judgment on your knowledge. I stand by it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And no way to leave a comment online or on the phone to that scuzz bucket Roberts. No one gives a hoot about the leak, you moron. You’re presiding over an illegitimate joke of a court.

You are so, so wrong.

Oh, I’m sorry. RWNJs who didn’t care about any of the horrific things Trump did - like put on two justices when he lost the vote and convince a third judge to retire so he could fill a third seat - are currently pretending this is bad.

No one decent cares about the leak. There. Fixed for clarity!

You know what I find totally disgusting?
When you are dissatisfied with a decision of the court, you immediately begin to impugn the integrity of any Justice who does not vote the way you want.
Sorry, Skippy. All of the Justices on the court were legitimately nominated and voted into power.

And, if you want to talk about a Justice being "convinced" to retire.... shall we talk about Justice Breyer?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/29/inside-campaign-pressure-justice-stephen-breyer-retire/

You are a real POS to try to defend McConnell et al.

But you didn't answer PP's question....what about Breyer?

What about him? Dude is in his 80s. You want to talk about pressure to retire, let's visit the sketchy decision of Justice Kennedy, shall we?

Which bank did his son work for again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

..we don't care about the leak. We care about the opinion.

You mean a draft opinion that is part of a lengthy deliberatively process within the Court before a final opinion is ultimately voted on and released? You mean that draft opinion?

Yes, that draft. The whole point of which was to get us talking about who leaked it, instead of what it actually says.

I wonder if Roberts is actually being clever. I don't believe he wants RVW overturned. I bet he likes the leak because people will be in an uproar and maybe this will mean the repeal doesn't go through. He has now validated that the leaked document is real, and looks like a good guy for launching his "investigation". If they said nothing the narrative could have been pushed that it's a fake.

Maybe this leak will prompt other actions like a federal women's protection law. This leak will light a fire under many buts.

He doesn’t look like a good guy for investigating this, he looks like a partisan hack who didn’t care that
- two seats were stolen from Democrats
- something hinky as hell happened to Kennedy to resign and get the Boofer on the court
- the three above justice perjured themselves
- Clarence Thomas may have been involved in the 1/6 coup and absolutely suffers from conflicts of interest that should see him off the court

In short Roberts is a moron. I hope those of you who are friends with that corrupt POS let him know what the world thinks of him.

Er, Roberts is not the CEO or the hiring partner of a law firm. He doesn't have anything to do with what happens during nominations.

You can think whatever you want but I don't agree with any of what you wrote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

..we don't care about the leak. We care about the opinion.

You mean a draft opinion that is part of a lengthy deliberatively process within the Court before a final opinion is ultimately voted on and released? You mean that draft opinion?

Yes, that draft. The whole point of which was to get us talking about who leaked it, instead of what it actually says.

I wonder if Roberts is actually being clever. I don't believe he wants RVW overturned. I bet he likes the leak because people will be in an uproar and maybe this will mean the repeal doesn't go through. He has now validated that the leaked document is real, and looks like a good guy for launching his "investigation". If they said nothing the narrative could have been pushed that it's a fake.

Maybe this leak will prompt other actions like a federal women's protection law. This leak will light a fire under many buts.

He doesn’t look like a good guy for investigating this, he looks like a partisan hack who didn’t care that
- two seats were stolen from Democrats
- something hinky as hell happened to Kennedy to resign and get the Boofer on the court
- the three above justice perjured themselves
- Clarence Thomas may have been involved in the 1/6 coup and absolutely suffers from conflicts of interest that should see him off the court

In short Roberts is a moron. I hope those of you who are friends with that corrupt POS let him know what the world thinks of him.

He didn't get where he is by being a moron.

He upheld Obamacare and has flipped to the liberal side several times. I think he's more complicated than you give him credit for.

[Anonymous]

I just came here to say Samuel Alito is a miserable piece of shit. He and Thomas are the two I’ll be most happy to see off the bench.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

..we don't care about the leak. We care about the opinion.

You mean a draft opinion that is part of a lengthy deliberatively process within the Court before a final opinion is ultimately voted on and released? You mean that draft opinion?

Yes, that draft. The whole point of which was to get us talking about who leaked it, instead of what it actually says.

I wonder if Roberts is actually being clever. I don't believe he wants RVW overturned. I bet he likes the leak because people will be in an uproar and maybe this will mean the repeal doesn't go through. He has now validated that the leaked document is real, and looks like a good guy for launching his "investigation". If they said nothing the narrative could have been pushed that it's a fake.

Maybe this leak will prompt other actions like a federal women's protection law. This leak will light a fire under many buts.

This court will overturn any federal women’s protection law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

..we don't care about the leak. We care about the opinion.

You mean a draft opinion that is part of a lengthy deliberatively process within the Court before a final opinion is ultimately voted on and released? You mean that draft opinion?

Yes, that draft. The whole point of which was to get us talking about who leaked it, instead of what it actually says.

I wonder if Roberts is actually being clever. I don't believe he wants RVW overturned. I bet he likes the leak because people will be in an uproar and maybe this will mean the repeal doesn't go through. He has now validated that the leaked document is real, and looks like a good guy for launching his "investigation". If they said nothing the narrative could have been pushed that it's a fake.

Maybe this leak will prompt other actions like a federal women's protection law. This leak will light a fire under many buts.

This court will overturn any federal women’s protection law.

That's just silly. No, they wouldn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

..we don't care about the leak. We care about the opinion.

You mean a draft opinion that is part of a lengthy deliberatively process within the Court before a final opinion is ultimately voted on and released? You mean that draft opinion?

Yes, that draft. The whole point of which was to get us talking about who leaked it, instead of what it actually says.

I wonder if Roberts is actually being clever. I don't believe he wants RVW overturned. I bet he likes the leak because people will be in an uproar and maybe this will mean the repeal doesn't go through. He has now validated that the leaked document is real, and looks like a good guy for launching his "investigation". If they said nothing the narrative could have been pushed that it's a fake.

Maybe this leak will prompt other actions like a federal women's protection law. This leak will light a fire under many buts.

He doesn’t look like a good guy for investigating this, he looks like a partisan hack who didn’t care that
- two seats were stolen from Democrats
- something hinky as hell happened to Kennedy to resign and get the Boofer on the court
- the three above justice perjured themselves
- Clarence Thomas may have been involved in the 1/6 coup and absolutely suffers from conflicts of interest that should see him off the court

In short Roberts is a moron. I hope those of you who are friends with that corrupt POS let him know what the world thinks of him.

Er, Roberts is not the CEO or the hiring partner of a law firm. He doesn't have anything to do with what happens during nominations.

You can think whatever you want but I don't agree with any of what you wrote.

If he can start an investigation into the leak, he can start an investigation into why three justices perjured themselves onto the court and into Thomas’s conflicts of interest/support for the insurrection. He doesn’t. Why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unpopular opinion: most voters won’t care.

What planet are you on?

The planet that elected Trump and all that he begot.

Exactly! Sorry guys, I’m a liberal dem. Used to be deeply involved in abortion rights. But I’m just sick of it. Y’all didn’t make it happen for Hillary. So this is what happens. Wake the F up. Even if you did vote for Hillary…if you’re white…I Fing guarantee you that you have family that voted for Trump. Get your house in order or STFU.

Yeah this is kind of where I’m at too.

YUP. All these idiots who still associate with Trumpers. If you didn’t cut dear old dad out of your life in 2016, I hope they come after your IVF stat.

Troll

Not all the embryos make it. This is on the chopping block.

PP here. And we're going to make sure it is. If you're going to marginalize low income women of color, we'll make sure rich white ladies can't have what they want either.

10000000% ill show you a bitter woman

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's time for a federal law protecting women's rights, not a Supreme Court decision. Roe was poorly written and poorly reasoned.

I don't mind constitutional Supreme Court justices. I'm pro-choice. I'm pro a real change that really protects women and a court decision isn't it. We need a federal law.

I say, yes, get rid of Roe v Wade and Gert something real on the books.

Getting rid of Roe before you have a congress that will vote something like that into law is going to harm women.

And if it's just a federal law then it will change the next time a GOP congress comes in. They will repeal it. So we'll have back and forth, back and forth, just like with the money that is given and then taken away to foreign aid organizations that hand out info about or help poor women get abortions.

While I am pro-choice, I don't believe that abortion was contemplated in the Constitution. The Roe decision does not flesh that out or make any kind of realistic argument in support. This women's right does not rest with the Supreme Court, unfortunately. We've just had justices willing to buffalo it along. I've been okay with that because I agree with the end result, I suppose. However, the Justices are not wrong with their reasoning here in this draft.

As a nation, we are stuck. I don't want a patchwork of laws throughout the country. I want women's rights to be protected and for women to have the choice uniformly. But, it does appear that the power does not rest at the federal level. It does rest at the state level.

It could rest at the state level, if Republicans were decent people. But they’re not and it shouldn’t. Forcing birth is in a sense compelled labor, slavery if you will. You sure you want to say that’s just “states rights”?

I don't want it to be states rights. I want a federal law. But, as mentioned by a PP, any federal law will just get overturned. So, we're stuck because the power does not rest with the Supreme Court. So, we can not want to be a state issue but it is actually a state issue. Unless we add it as an amendment to the Constitution, which I'd be in favor of but that's unlikely to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

..we don't care about the leak. We care about the opinion.

You mean a draft opinion that is part of a lengthy deliberatively process within the Court before a final opinion is ultimately voted on and released? You mean that draft opinion?

Yes, that draft. The whole point of which was to get us talking about who leaked it, instead of what it actually says.

I wonder if Roberts is actually being clever. I don't believe he wants RVW overturned. I bet he likes the leak because people will be in an uproar and maybe this will mean the repeal doesn't go through. He has now validated that the leaked document is real, and looks like a good guy for launching his "investigation". If they said nothing the narrative could have been pushed that it's a fake.

Maybe this leak will prompt other actions like a federal women's protection law. This leak will light a fire under many buts.

He doesn’t look like a good guy for investigating this, he looks like a partisan hack who didn’t care that
- two seats were stolen from Democrats
- something hinky as hell happened to Kennedy to resign and get the Boofer on the court
- the three above justice perjured themselves
- Clarence Thomas may have been involved in the 1/6 coup and absolutely suffers from conflicts of interest that should see him off the court

In short Roberts is a moron. I hope those of you who are friends with that corrupt POS let him know what the world thinks of him.

He didn't get where he is by being a moron.

He upheld Obamacare and has flipped to the liberal side several times. I think he's more complicated than you give him credit for.

See my response at 11:51. He’s not clever. He just likes the veneer of respectability. Stripped of that, he’s presiding over an illegitimate court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An alternative view

Are you kidding? This guy doesn’t matter.

I’m the mother of two adopted, not at birth, toddlers. I was hounded recently on Twitter that I bought my children. The woman hounding me runs an anti adoption group on Facebook and Instagram. The point of the Twitter discussion was I said adoptees should have the right to learn who their birth parents are. This woman is adopted and would rather have been aborted. Many of the people on the Facebook page say the same. Adoptive parents can’t win I guess. Clearly many adoptees have life long pain.

Facebook is your first problem….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Susan Collins, just now: Gorsuch and Kavanaugh lied to me!

Nooooo, Susan, really?

Told you so. What are you going to do about it, sister?

She needs to resign. Everyone in the world knew these two were lying except her. Dangerous to have someone that naive in the Senate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's time for a federal law protecting women's rights, not a Supreme Court decision. Roe was poorly written and poorly reasoned.

I don't mind constitutional Supreme Court justices. I'm pro-choice. I'm pro a real change that really protects women and a court decision isn't it. We need a federal law.

I say, yes, get rid of Roe v Wade and Gert something real on the books.

Getting rid of Roe before you have a congress that will vote something like that into law is going to harm women.

And if it's just a federal law then it will change the next time a GOP congress comes in. They will repeal it. So we'll have back and forth, back and forth, just like with the money that is given and then taken away to foreign aid organizations that hand out info about or help poor women get abortions.

While I am pro-choice, I don't believe that abortion was contemplated in the Constitution. The Roe decision does not flesh that out or make any kind of realistic argument in support. This women's right does not rest with the Supreme Court, unfortunately. We've just had justices willing to buffalo it along. I've been okay with that because I agree with the end result, I suppose. However, the Justices are not wrong with their reasoning here in this draft.

As a nation, we are stuck. I don't want a patchwork of laws throughout the country. I want women's rights to be protected and for women to have the choice uniformly. But, it does appear that the power does not rest at the federal level. It does rest at the state level.

It could rest at the state level, if Republicans were decent people. But they’re not and it shouldn’t. Forcing birth is in a sense compelled labor, slavery if you will. You sure you want to say that’s just “states rights”?

I don't want it to be states rights. I want a federal law. But, as mentioned by a PP, any federal law will just get overturned. So, we're stuck because the power does not rest with the Supreme Court. So, we can not want to be a state issue but it is actually a state issue. Unless we add it as an amendment to the Constitution, which I'd be in favor of but that's unlikely to happen.

Which is more unlikely? That the Supreme Court will abandon stare decisis and delegitimize abortion, interracial marriage, gay sex, etc. or a constitutional amendment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Susan Collins, just now: Gorsuch and Kavanaugh lied to me!

Nooooo, Susan, really?

Told you so. What are you going to do about it, sister?

She needs to resign. Everyone in the world knew these two were lying except her. Dangerous to have someone that naive in the Senate.

Susie was one of the Republicans to curiously, curiously outstrip her polling by a pretty hefty margin.