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: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.
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 wrote:Anonymous wrote:
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.
Does the SCOTUS have a constitutional right to privacy?
Anonymous wrote:Dems in conservative-run states should start introducing bills to make men who impregnate women responsible for ALL of their bills related to pregnancy, from doctor appointments to missed days of work to new maternity clothes. And then the hospital bills. And the postnatal bills. And of course all the money to raise the kid. But if life starts from conception then the man needs to be on the hook from the moment of conception, since without his sperm a woman wouldn't have those bills.
Anonymous wrote:
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 wrote:Anonymous wrote:
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.
Overturning Roe on a conservative/liberal split will do irreparable damage to SCOTUS. The facade of the impartial Justice was already waning, it's gone after this.
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: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:
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 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:
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 wrote:
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 wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Here's what an America without Roe will look like.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/05/upshot/abortion-without-roe-wade.html?fbclid=IwAR0y91eQGNT6PDe3p6m7HGvhcmH-CsfyTlgYg4pSoddiJJSlyQ6NsehlvZA
Here are the clinics that would close immediately due to trigger laws.
Very likely that trigger laws ban IVF in at least a dozen states this summer:
One of the legislative initiatives that has been undertaken by several states is a statute creating a trigger ban on abortion, wherein the Supreme Court striking down Roe would immediately result in an automatic complete abortion ban statewide.2 So far, twelve states3 have passed such trigger bans, and several other states are poised to follow and ban abortion entirely, should Roe be overturned.4 These trigger bans could have far-reaching, unintended (or perhaps completely intended) consequences not only for pregnant people, but also for those trying to prevent pregnancy through common methods such as birth control or the “morning after” pill.5 Additionally, the trigger bans may have significant impacts on those pursuing in vitro fertilization (IVF), as well as on the providers of such services.6
https://www.law.georgetown.edu/gender-journal/abortion-trigger-ban-statutes-impacts-on-plan-b-birth-control-and-ivf-treatments/
Good bye, IVF.
Wonder how white republicans women feel about this
If they support overturning Roe, they deserve to be barren.