Anonymous wrote:Politico has seen the 98-page draft opinion. No, they’re not going to say that when they haven’t. Yes, it was effing leaked.

So, here is what we do:

Every sexually active woman in America: STOP F'cking your BF, lover, husband RIGHT NOW and make it clear : NO SEX for you EVER AGAIN unless this decision is re- written

No Congressman, Senator, Lobbyist, Lawyer in Washington is getting any PuXXy EVER AGAIN unless this legal draft is ABORTED

If men think THEY can control what We as Women do with OUR BODIES then , literally, teach them the lesson of what we can DENY THEM

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

Unauthorized disclosures are generally illegal, but even for classified info, the sentences are usually pretty light relative to the damage.

The court is self governing and doesn't have rules about this. I am sorry, if one justice can participate in a coup against the country and not hasve to recuse themselves from related cases, then I don't GAF about this.

See how shattering norms and rules works?

I find it difficult to believe SCOTUS has no rules to protect its deliberative process.

I have heard former SCOTUS clerks say they were warned on the first day of the job that leaking opinions would not be tolerated and would end in dismissal and disbarment. So, I do believe they have rules.
Add to that the fact that no opinion has ever been leaked before.

This person needs to be identified immediately and dealt with. This is unacceptable.

So you’re more concerned with the leak than the fact that SCOTUS doing away with right to privacy? Good stuff.

Yes, I actually am. And, they are NOT doing away with the right to privacy if this report is accurate.
They are not even making abortion illegal. They are returning the decision to the people.... to be decided by the state officials elected by the people.

A breach such as this is actually an insurrection on the court. It is appalling and needs to be addressed immediately.

Excellent summary. Exactly correct.

+1

Many people are too emotionally charged over the draft opinion to comprehend what it actually means, and to comprehend the damage that was inflicted upon the court by the leak.

The Court was already damaged.

It’s partisan and impacts the lives of Americans more than Congress does.

So, if the Court had decided (or decides ultimately) to uphold Roe, would you still be saying that it's damaged? Are you only saying this because the Court may issue an opinion with which you disagree?

When the Court is wildly out of step with the country, that's a problem.

This ruling is a problem. The Court is broken. Sotomayor was right. Roberts was right.

The Court is not designed to simply “go with the flow” of popular public opinion.

it was put in place (in recent years) to do exactly this - overturn Roe v Wade. We shouldn't be surprised.

Yes, this has been the long play.

McConnell blocking nomination.
Kennedy deal to retire.
Three judicial nominees blatantly lying to Congress.
Back channel activism via spouses.

This goes back MUCH further. Read the article linked ^^.

Are we sure about this? Susan Collins said she looked into their eyes

Now it'll be entirely unclear if Republicans will win in the midterms. They picked a really great time to rock the boat on a super charged issue that will absolutely rally the Democrat base to get out and vote.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Unauthorized disclosures are generally illegal, but even for classified info, the sentences are usually pretty light relative to the damage.

The court is self governing and doesn't have rules about this. I am sorry, if one justice can participate in a coup against the country and not hasve to recuse themselves from related cases, then I don't GAF about this.

See how shattering norms and rules works?

I find it difficult to believe SCOTUS has no rules to protect its deliberative process.

I have heard former SCOTUS clerks say they were warned on the first day of the job that leaking opinions would not be tolerated and would end in dismissal and disbarment. So, I do believe they have rules.
Add to that the fact that no opinion has ever been leaked before.

This person needs to be identified immediately and dealt with. This is unacceptable.

So you’re more concerned with the leak than the fact that SCOTUS doing away with right to privacy? Good stuff.

Yes, I actually am. And, they are NOT doing away with the right to privacy if this report is accurate.
They are not even making abortion illegal. They are returning the decision to the people.... to be decided by the state officials elected by the people.

A breach such as this is actually an insurrection on the court. It is appalling and needs to be addressed immediately.

Excellent summary. Exactly correct.

+1

Many people are too emotionally charged over the draft opinion to comprehend what it actually means, and to comprehend the damage that was inflicted upon the court by the leak.

The Court was already damaged.

It’s partisan and impacts the lives of Americans more than Congress does.

Perhaps Congress should do their jobs.

+1

Impeach the liars and cheats.

Anonymous wrote:A SC justice took $600,000 into his household from groups opposed to abortion. It’s insane that he hasn’t recused.

CJ Roberts needs to force the issue into the public.

This.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Unauthorized disclosures are generally illegal, but even for classified info, the sentences are usually pretty light relative to the damage.

The court is self governing and doesn't have rules about this. I am sorry, if one justice can participate in a coup against the country and not hasve to recuse themselves from related cases, then I don't GAF about this.

See how shattering norms and rules works?

I find it difficult to believe SCOTUS has no rules to protect its deliberative process.

I have heard former SCOTUS clerks say they were warned on the first day of the job that leaking opinions would not be tolerated and would end in dismissal and disbarment. So, I do believe they have rules.
Add to that the fact that no opinion has ever been leaked before.

This person needs to be identified immediately and dealt with. This is unacceptable.

So you’re more concerned with the leak than the fact that SCOTUS doing away with right to privacy? Good stuff.

Yes, I actually am. And, they are NOT doing away with the right to privacy if this report is accurate.
They are not even making abortion illegal. They are returning the decision to the people.... to be decided by the state officials elected by the people.

A breach such as this is actually an insurrection on the court. It is appalling and needs to be addressed immediately.

Excellent summary. Exactly correct.

+1

Many people are too emotionally charged over the draft opinion to comprehend what it actually means, and to comprehend the damage that was inflicted upon the court by the leak.

The Court was already damaged.

It’s partisan and impacts the lives of Americans more than Congress does.

So, if the Court had decided (or decides ultimately) to uphold Roe, would you still be saying that it's damaged? Are you only saying this because the Court may issue an opinion with which you disagree?

Yes.
No.

Anything else?

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.

Unauthorized disclosures are generally illegal, but even for classified info, the sentences are usually pretty light relative to the damage.

The court is self governing and doesn't have rules about this. I am sorry, if one justice can participate in a coup against the country and not hasve to recuse themselves from related cases, then I don't GAF about this.

See how shattering norms and rules works?

I find it difficult to believe SCOTUS has no rules to protect its deliberative process.

I have heard former SCOTUS clerks say they were warned on the first day of the job that leaking opinions would not be tolerated and would end in dismissal and disbarment. So, I do believe they have rules.
Add to that the fact that no opinion has ever been leaked before.

This person needs to be identified immediately and dealt with. This is unacceptable.

Right after we find out about Clarence Thomas' involvment in the insurrection. Oh, and deal with justice lying under oath about stare decisis.

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

Unauthorized disclosures are generally illegal, but even for classified info, the sentences are usually pretty light relative to the damage.

The court is self governing and doesn't have rules about this. I am sorry, if one justice can participate in a coup against the country and not hasve to recuse themselves from related cases, then I don't GAF about this.

See how shattering norms and rules works?

I find it difficult to believe SCOTUS has no rules to protect its deliberative process.

I have heard former SCOTUS clerks say they were warned on the first day of the job that leaking opinions would not be tolerated and would end in dismissal and disbarment. So, I do believe they have rules.
Add to that the fact that no opinion has ever been leaked before.

This person needs to be identified immediately and dealt with. This is unacceptable.

So you’re more concerned with the leak than the fact that SCOTUS doing away with right to privacy? Good stuff.

Yes, I actually am. And, they are NOT doing away with the right to privacy if this report is accurate.
They are not even making abortion illegal. They are returning the decision to the people.... to be decided by the state officials elected by the people.

A breach such as this is actually an insurrection on the court. It is appalling and needs to be addressed immediately.

Excellent summary. Exactly correct.

+1

Many people are too emotionally charged over the draft opinion to comprehend what it actually means, and to comprehend the damage that was inflicted upon the court by the leak.

The Court was already damaged.

It’s partisan and impacts the lives of Americans more than Congress does.

So, if the Court had decided (or decides ultimately) to uphold Roe, would you still be saying that it's damaged? Are you only saying this because the Court may issue an opinion with which you disagree?

When the Court is wildly out of step with the country, that's a problem.

This ruling is a problem. The Court is broken. Sotomayor was right. Roberts was right.

The Court is not designed to simply “go with the flow” of popular public opinion.

it was put in place (in recent years) to do exactly this - overturn Roe v Wade. We shouldn't be surprised.

Yes, this has been the long play.

McConnell blocking nomination.
Kennedy deal to retire.
Three judicial nominees blatantly lying to Congress.
Back channel activism via spouses.

For some reason this leak cannot be discussed in the college forum but I would think about it when looking for a school. Anyone that might assist a person seeking an abortion could be in violation if some of these crazy laws and what does that even mean? Can your student discuss it, or give someone a ride or belong to a pro choice organization, etc etc?

Maybe find a state for your son'snand daughters educations that have some respect for the reproductive rights of the people in that state.

Trump always delivers for his partners.

^^

Anonymous wrote:A SC justice took $600,000 into his household from groups opposed to abortion. It’s insane that he hasn’t recused.

CJ Roberts needs to force the issue into the public.

+1

Anonymous wrote:Are any protests or marches being planned? I feel ill- I want to do something productive.

+1

Sign me up.

A SC justice took $600,000 into his household from groups opposed to abortion. It’s insane that he hasn’t recused.

CJ Roberts needs to force the issue into the public.