Judges don't look at polled opinion to make decisions. Typically they look at the law.
Is there a single other legal precedent or law that imposes restrictions on someone's bodily autonomy for a period of time as a result of private behavior that is not against the law?
This should be issue number 1 for libertarians. Instead they prefer to debate seat belts.
You're the real victim here.
Great job - you just explained why this is a horrible decision. They didn't look to the law, Roe and Casey. They looked to what a vocal minority wanted as an outcome and went straight there.
Not a fan of that interpretation because I think the 14th Amendment cabins the scope of the 9th Amendment, at least when the rubber hits the road on divisive issues like abortion.
Maybe euthanasia?
That's what we call an opinion.
The evangelicals have the re ed world view.
You've used words here, but you've said nothing.
That's what we call settled law.
Yet you side with them.
Every.
Single.
Time.
you're trying to make this about child support.
Tweet's aren't controlling law and don't have any precedential value. You should really shut the up.
Weird considering they are overturning long standing established law
That comment was just putting perspective to the comments on the previous page.
If you are losing your on spurstalk then it's time to get off the internet for the day.
You're saying even less now. You should actually shut the up.
You should take your own advice.
lol demonic
Just a bit of positive news on this dark day.
It is congresses responsibility to make laws, not the courts. Democrats control the house, the senate, and the Presidency. If they wanted to legalize abortion they could do it next week.
If Republicans wanted to make it illegal they could have done it years ago.
Why did they rely on the courts to nullify existing law?
Roberts called the marshal to find out the criminal who leaked the info
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
