Jump to content

BREAKING: SCOTUS to overturn Roe?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

lets kick back same sex marriage, interracial marriage, racial issues, environmental legilsation, health and safety, edcational standards back to the states too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

SCOTUS has stated: Yesterday, a news organization published a copy of a draft opinion in a pending case. Justices circulate draft opinions internally as a routine and essential part of the Court’s confidential deliberative work. Although the document described in yesterday’s reports is authentic, it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case.

 

Chief Justice John G. Roberts. Jr., provided the following statement:

 

To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. The work of the Court will not be affected in any way.

 

We at the Court are blessed to have a workforce - permanent employees and law clerks alike - intensely loyal to the institution and dedicated to the rule of law. Court employees have an exemplary and important tradition of respecting the confidentiality of the judicial process and upholding the trust of the Court. This was a singular and egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the Court and the community of public servants who work here. I have directed the Marshal of the Court to launch an investigation into the source of the leak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if abortion is highly restricted in some states it will be less restricted in other states. I would think pro choice would come up with funding for those to travel for the procedure. The more restrictive will have them consider birth control as the option. It's not as if abortion would become illegal in the entire US.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TH3 said:

lets kick back same sex marriage, interracial marriage, racial issues, environmental legilsation, health and safety, edcational standards back to the states too!

Sorry....we can only deal with one society-ending crisis per day.  All lines are busy.  Please call back later.

  • Haha (+1) 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another perspective on the origins of the leak. Interesting thread to read through. Blaming anyone for the leak at this point is foolish.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

 

As soon as it goes to States its immediately legal at its minimum in 48 States.  

 

Red States have already passed heartbeat bills, illegal at 20 weeks, etc. 

 

What are Ds going to do?  Run on legalizing abortion till after birth everywhere?

 

Good luck with that.  

 

13 states have trigger laws automatically banning most or all abortions if Supreme Court overturns Roe v Wade

 

Thirteen states in the country are poised to enact immediate abortion bans and 13 more could quickly follow suit if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, as it appears set to do according to a draft opinion leaked to Politico.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/13-states-trigger-laws-automatically-abortion-supreme-court-roe-v-wade

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, ALF said:

 

13 states have trigger laws automatically banning most or all abortions if Supreme Court overturns Roe v Wade

 

Thirteen states in the country are poised to enact immediate abortion bans and 13 more could quickly follow suit if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, as it appears set to do according to a draft opinion leaked to Politico.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/13-states-trigger-laws-automatically-abortion-supreme-court-roe-v-wade

 

Or put another way....THREE QUARTERS of the States will see no change in abortion laws if the Supreme Court ruling comes down.  And of the one quarter that remain, even those states can re-look at the issue through legislative action.

Next!

Edited by SoCal Deek
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Eyeroll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not down with killing babies but if you try and outlaw abortions people will just go to other states, countries, use coat hangers, etc. It's not something you can affectively mandate. Do we really want sh*tty people who are poor and on drugs and can't even take care of themselves to be forced to carry a child and then care for them? It's a terrible situation either way.

 

As a compromise how about everyone who gets an abortion, their name is made public and people can do with that what they will. A little shaming may go a long way. If you go for a job or meet a love interest etc they can look and see you have had multiple abortions and they might change their opinion of you. Even people that are for the right to choose aren't going to be cool with that kind of info

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Very saddened by a lot of this.
 

First and foremost disgusted that this was leaked. Further disgusted that the supreme court is full of shills that will say one thing during confirmation hearings and completely depart from that. I would expect that sort of behavior from your typical elected official not the highest court. It should freak out any thinking individual that SCOTUS has become as politicized as it has. 
 

Even taking this issue back up….why?
 

 

Edited by Rockpile233
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Rockpile233 said:

Very saddened by a lot of this.
 

First and foremost disgusted that this was leaked. Further disgusted that the supreme court is full of shills that will say one thing during confirmation hearings and completely depart from that. I would expect that sort of behavior from your typical elected official not the highest court. It should freak out any thinking individual that SCOTUS has become as politicized as it has. 
 

 

I think your concern is misplaced. The Justices should really not be asked about how they might rule on FUTURE cases during their confirmation. I’m always happy when they tell congress that they’re not going to go down that path… whether Left or Right leaning. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

I think your concern is misplaced. The Justices should really not be asked about how they might rule on FUTURE cases during their confirmation. I’m always happy when they tell congress that they’re not going to go down that path… whether Left or Right leaning. 


But they didn’t answer that way…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rockpile233 said:


But they didn’t answer that way…

They should. That’s the entire point of being a judge. They really aren’t supposed to look at things in the hypothetical. It’s a nuance that’s been created by the bad behavior of Congress, not by the judges. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

They should. That’s the entire point of being a judge. They really aren’t supposed to look at things in the hypothetical. It’s a nuance that’s been created by the bad behavior of Congress, not by the judges. 

Once again…they did not answer this way. Why not?

 

Why pick this old issue up again anyway with less than 30% support nationally? Nothing more important?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...