Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Republican president and Congress elected in 2024. What happens when they ban abortion everywhere? Are people just going to put up with it? Is this when the US finally bursts? Trump or DeSantis would love to do this.[/quote] They can’t "ban abortion everywhere" because it’s not a Federal issue, it’s a State issue. That’s exactly what this draft is saying. It would be a State by State issue, just like drivers license age, age of consent, etc. it’s not that complicated to understand. [/quote] Addressed so, so many times in this thread and if you don’t think the GOP would ram through a nationwide ban, you need to abstain from voting for about ten years. Sit in a corner and think about your mistakes. [/quote] They can’t ram through a nationwide ban, because, again, the SC just said it’s not a federal issue (if this actually passes)[/quote] No, I don't think so. Reversing Roe doesn't bar Congress from enacting a law banning abortion nationwide or mandating abortion access nationwide. All it does is reverse the finding that women have the right to an abortion based on a Constitutional right to privacy, which the Court now thinks you don't have. Any federal legislation would of course be challenged immediately in court. A federal ban would likely eventually be struck down based on the principle that states can guarantee rights in excess of federal rights. A federal law guaranteeing abortion access might stand based on some other part of the Constitution - interstate commerce is usually the clause of choice, but there could be a full faith and credit argument in there. Or it could be tied to federal funding, in which case, many conservative states might opt to forego that funding, which would certainly be quite the experiment in states rights.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics