SCOTUS Poised to Overturn Roe v Wade per leaked opinion

[DMC]

Sounds like god can’t count, figured you’d be a fan

The 7th is sinning against the holy spirit and is unforgivable. Don't do that.

[Dirks_Finale]

So this is a ploy to try and save Democrats in the midterms. Luckily for the GOP, things have been so awful under Biden that it wont work. It does effect the election, though. Instead of winning 70 house seats they will win 45, IMO.

If the leak is true and my understanding is correct, this means that abortion rights go back to the states. So no more liberals fleeing NY and California and bringing their poor choice voting habits to Texas and Florida. Sounds like a win for Red states.

I've been saying for the past 2 years that the country is more divided than ever and that you will see red states getting redder and blue states getting bluer. Looks as though I was correct on that front.

[CosmicCowboy]

I support abortion rights in the first two trimesters but also agree with the courts decision. As Alito specifically stated, the cons ution says nothing about abortion. Its up the the country's elected officials to vote on abortion rights. Democrats could legalize abortion through congress next week if they wanted to.

[Dirks_Finale]

I support abortion rights in the first two trimesters but also agree with the courts decision. As Alito specifically stated, the cons ution says nothing about abortion. Its up the the country's elected officials to vote on abortion rights. Democrats could legalize abortion through congress next week if they wanted to.

Wouldn't they have to nuke the filibuster to get it done, though? Manchinema says no.

[CosmicCowboy]

Wouldn't they have to nuke the filibuster to get it done, though? Manchinema says no.

I think they could get 60 votes in the senate. All Republicans aren't against abortion. At the very least make every one of them vote yes or no.

[Trainwreck2100]

I support abortion rights in the first two trimesters but also agree with the courts decision. As Alito specifically stated, the cons ution says nothing about abortion. Its up the the country's elected officials to vote on abortion rights. Democrats could legalize abortion through congress next week if they wanted to.

doesn't say anything about gay marriage or interracial marriage either

[vy65]

Lol at overturning a 50 year old precedent on the basis of stare decisis. But putting that off to the side, this has the potential to have some really negative economic impacts on Texas. This states growth is fueled by energy and tech, the latter of which is a notoriously liberal industry. I can’t imagine companies in Austin (or even Dallas) will be thinking that they can attract talent to a state that has gone full Christian jihad. Talent is one of the keys to corporate growth, but particularly in the tech space. Yes Texas is business friendly and has a cheap cost of living - that’s why so many corporations leveraged those things to attract talent.

In an era where the SEC is requiring ESG disclosures in corporate filings of public companies, Texas going full Saudi Arabia because it’s been empowered by SCOTUS will really do a lot of work to drive away the economic progress of the past 5-10 years. The irony of all this is that it will come on the call of a rural minority who holds more state legislature seats in holes like Lubbock. But hey, Jesus hates dead babies, which matters to some inbred mongoloid living in a trailer in Abilene.

[vy65]

I support abortion rights in the first two trimesters but also agree with the courts decision. As Alito specifically stated, the cons ution says nothing about abortion. Its up the the country's elected officials to vote on abortion rights. Democrats could legalize abortion through congress next week if they wanted to.

The cons ution also has the 3/5ths compromise, what’s your point?

We don’t practice medicine like it’s 1776, so why should we run our country like it is?

[CosmicCowboy]

The cons ution also has the 3/5ths compromise, what’s your point?

We don’t practice medicine like it’s 1776, so why should we run our country like it is?

Why are you against our elected representatives voting on abortion rights? Isn't that how the system is supposed to work? Its not the Supreme Courts job to make laws.

[vy65]

Why are you against congress voting on abortion rights? Isn't that how the system is supposed to work? Its not the Supreme courts job to make laws.

You’re moving goal posts. Originalism acts like it’s 1776, which is facially laughable. Can we agree on that?

As for the new question you’re asking, it’s the same principle as to why states shouldn’t be allowed to segregate races or ban interracial marriages. There are fundamental rights at stake that some states will infringe upon. It’s why we fought a civil war and have a 14th amendment which, coincidentally, a lot of conservatives tend to forget/ignore

[vy65]

Dp

[CosmicCowboy]

Dp

I didn't switch goal posts. I clearly stated in my post it was up to elected officials to vote on it. It can be a federal vote.

[vy65]

I didn't switch goal posts. I clearly stated in my post it was up to elected officials to vote on it. It can be a federal vote.

You also claimed that the cons ution doesn’t mention “abortion.” That’s an originalist argument. Do you still think that’s a good basis for this opinion, and if so, why are we acting like it’s 1776 in the year 2020?

I also responded to the elected official business

[Winehole23]

Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett lied.

So did all the right wingers who claimed this day would never come, and that the libs were catastrophizing about the last three Supreme Court nominations.

[Winehole23]

What they are today is a possible overturn of RvW. I'd have to defer to the legal scholars here but states' rights seem to be the driving factor here. This is assuming anything changes at all.

based on what part of the leaked text?

what I see there turns on privacy rights, not federalism.

[vy65]

based on what part of the leaked text?

what I see there turns on privacy rights, not federalism.

Bingo.

[vy65]

Women will die and many babies will still die or be born with severe defects, but let's not pretend you care about any of this. It's really about punishing the sexually active because you're jealous of them.

I agree with this. That said, part of me also believes that this result came about, at least in part, as a way to “trigger dem libs,” eg as a backlash against all the woke bull . I don’t know that conservatives would have been rallied to the point of overturning RvW had they not been galvanized by all that nonsense.

[Winehole23]

20th century US precedent: bad, not deeply rooted in history.

18th century English precedent: rooted deeply in history, good

[Winehole23]

I think they could get 60 votes in the senate. All Republicans aren't against abortion. At the very least make every one of them vote yes or no.

[Winehole23]

Go ahead CC, name the Republican Senators who will vote with Dems on this. Show us how they would get to 60.

[Winehole23]

Bingo.

a key passage is embedded here

[Nathan89]

This should be the top priority at the moment.

[hater]

Making the election about abortion and not inflation, biden, covid, economy, war is the only chance democrats have to avoid a total bloodbath.

Very convenient and it seems repugs and judges are helping democrats here. No reason to do this right before elections.

[Winehole23]

Susan Collins pouts

If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office

[Nathan89]

We should start teaching percentages in math with statistics based on how developed babies are at time of abortion.