Roe vs Wade overturned

[Kaitzilla]

TRAP laws are certainly putting the squeeze on abortion clinics in many states by raising safety standards to lunar orbit.
https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/14/health/kentucky-last-abortion-clinic/index.html

About 1 million abortions per year are mostly performed at abortion clinics in the US.
http://www.slate.com/articles/doubl...tions_performed_in_clinics_not_hospitals.html


Some states only have 1 abortion clinic, and the numbers go down every year.
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-many-abortion-clinics-are-in-america-each-state-2017-2


The debate will intensify in 4 days when the Dr. Kermit Gosnell movie starring Dean Cain comes out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermit_Gosnell
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosnell:_The_Trial_of_America's_Biggest_Serial_Killer

The push to ban abortion again is very real, but it will take 1 or 2 more conservative supreme court justices to make it happen.
5v4 overturning Roe vs. Wade won't happen, but 6v3 or 7v2 would be much more politically acceptable if Trump can make another SCOTUS pick get through.

I was wrong yet again.

Roe vs. Wade fell to a 5-4 vote.

Also, if Hobbsyoyo is still around out there somewhere, I was also wrong about the republicans and he was right.


Sorry for the thread Necro, but it is a day for hat consumption.

 

[GamezRule]

I was wrong yet again.

Roe vs. Wade fell to a 5-4 vote.

Also, if Hobbsyoyo is still around out there somewhere, I was also wrong about the republicans and he was right.


Sorry for the thread Necro, but it is a day for hat consumption.

I was surprised to see that John Roberts dissented, not because I believe he wanted to see Roe overturned but rather as Chief Justice seat I believe he could have written the opinion himself and used that power to try to make it as undamaging as possible.

 

[caketastydelish]

A lot of people were wrong who said it wouldn't be overturned. Now what?

 

[IglooDame]

A lot of people were wrong who said it wouldn't be overturned. Now what?

Ritual seppuku seems the only option for them.

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

Now this is the perfect necro

Shame its about such abhorrent and chaotic news.

 

[stinkubus]

A lot of people were wrong who said it wouldn't be overturned. Now what?

I would sincerely hope that they can cast aside what their schooling and the media have tried to teach them about the role of the courts in our country. For most of this nation's history the Supreme Court has been a brutal, reactionary force. What we are witnessing now is a return to normalcy. What prevailed before was the aberration. Allowing the high court to invalidate acts of congress is fundamentally undemocratic. Plenty of other nations that no American would consider dictatorships do not confer this power to their judiciary.

Public opinion is turning against the court. I honestly didn't expect the overturning of abortion rights to move the needle all that much. Abortion has been restricted so severely in most red states that life as of right now isn't, materially speaking, all that much different than it was last night. In his concurring opinion Thomas has alluded that the court may go after contraception next and that's when I'm hoping the levee breaks.

 

[Joij21]

The precedent for the right to travel dates back only to 1868, so the Supreme Court should have no problem overturning it.

What 1868 precedent are we talking about? Is it an actual Amendment or just a court ruling?

Because if it ain't codified as an actual Amendment, it can easily be overturned simply by having future justices "reevaluate" the legal language and "reinterpret" it.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Ritual seppuku seems the only option for them.

Dishonor! Dishonor on everybody!

 

[caketastydelish]

I would sincerely hope that they can cast aside what their schooling and the media have tried to teach them about the role of the courts in our country. For most of this nation's history the Supreme Court has been a brutal, reactionary force. What we are witnessing now is a return to normalcy. What prevailed before was the aberration. Allowing the high court to invalidate acts of congress is fundamentally undemocratic. Plenty of other nations that no American would consider dictatorships do not confer this power to their judiciary.

Public opinion is turning against the court. I honestly didn't expect the overturning of abortion rights to move the needle all that much. Abortion has been restricted so severely in most red states that life as of right now isn't, materially speaking, all that much different than it was last night. In his concurring opinion Thomas has alluded that the court may go after contraception next and that's when I'm hoping the levee breaks.

Is there any concrete movement (within the supreme court itself, not the general population) to get contraceptives banned?

 

[IglooDame]

What 1868 precedent are we talking about? Is it an actual Amendment or just a court ruling?

Because if it ain't codified as an actual Amendment, it can easily be overturned simply by having future justices "reevaluate" the legal language and "reinterpret" it.

This isn't new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions

In fact Planned Parenthood v Casey, Obergefell, Lawrence v Texas, and the one everyone's heard of Brown v Board of Education have all overturned existing precedent. For better or for worse, it works both ways.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I think it goes back to the Articles of Confederation

IV. The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different States in this Union, the free inhabitants of each of these States, paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several States; and the people of each State shall free ingress and regress to and from any other State, and shall enjoy therein all the privileges of trade and commerce, subject to the same duties, impositions, and restrictions as the inhabitants thereof respectively, provided that such restrictions shall not extend so far as to prevent the removal of property imported into any State, to any other State, of which the owner is an inhabitant; provided also that no imposition, duties or restriction shall be laid by any State, on the property of the United States, or either of them.

 

[choxorn]

Allowing the high court to invalidate acts of congress is fundamentally undemocratic.

This ruling doesn't actually invalidate any previous congressional acts, because congress never bothered to actually write a law saying "you have the right to abortions"

Is there any concrete movement (within the supreme court itself, not the general population) to get contraceptives banned?

Alito and Thomas have both suggested that they think the ruling that said the state can't ban contraceptives was wrong. Whether that means there's at least 5 on the court in favor of overturning Grisworld is harder to say.

 

[caketastydelish]

I don't know this for a fact, but my assumption is there aren't as many (ordinary) people against contraceptives as there are against abortion. I live in a conservative part of Texas and even around here hardly anyone wants to ban contraceptives. At least to the best of my knowledge. If banning contraceptives is not popular even amongst Republicans then I doubt it's going anywhere.

 

[choxorn]

Banning abortion isn't popular either, but that didn't stop them. It might not happen, but there absolutely have been some Republicans saying Grisworld was wrong. We really can't assume that there's something they wouldn't ever do because it's unpopular because they don't care.

 

[sophie]

I don't know this for a fact, but my assumption is there aren't as many (ordinary) people against contraceptives as there are against abortion. I live in a conservative part of Texas and even around here hardly anyone wants to ban contraceptives. At least to the best of my knowledge. If banning contraceptives is not popular even amongst Republicans then I doubt it's going anywhere.

Yeah well 75% of Americans wanted Roe v. Wade kept in place and look where that got us.

 

[JollyRoger]

I believe Loving was not based on "substantive due process" like those decisions listed. Still, rather convenient for himself

These statutes also deprive the Lovings of liberty without due process of law in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.
  Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law.

— Loving, 388 U.S. at 12

 

[caketastydelish]

I've never heard anyone seriously argue "contraceptives is murder".

 

[JollyRoger]

I was surprised to see that John Roberts dissented, not because I believe he wanted to see Roe overturned but rather as Chief Justice seat I believe he could have written the opinion himself and used that power to try to make it as undamaging as possible.

He concurred in the judgment (upholding Mississippi's restrictions) but couldn't attract a single vote to that line of thinking. There is no way he would have written an opinion striking down Roe and no way any of the other 5 conservatives would have signed onto an opinion that didn't strike down Roe.

 

[Kaitzilla]

Tentatively speaking, the next thing I predict the court will never do is come down hard on the administrative state that writes all the regulations that have the force of law.

It might be proper to have Congress vote on every little detail, but such a hardcore ruling would cause total chaos as we attempted to return to a century ago.

The CDC eviction moratorium along with the OSHA covid-vaccine-in-the-workplace being overturned months ago would be the tip of the iceberg of what that would look like.

A congressional declaration of war is also never making a comeback.

 

[JollyRoger]

Tentatively speaking, the next thing I predict the court will never do is come down hard on the administrative state that writes all the regulations that have the force of law.

It might be proper to have Congress vote on every little detail, but such a hardcore ruling would cause total chaos as we attempted to return to a century ago.

The CDC eviction moratorium along with the OSHA covid-vaccine-in-the-workplace being overturned months ago would be the tip of the iceberg of what that would look like.

It's been moving in that direction for a number of years with some of the key precedents being cut back.