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?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
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 wrote:
How does the leaker change anything?
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?
Anonymous wrote:
How does the leaker change anything?
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.
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?
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.