BREAKING: Roe v. Wade might be overruled or severely weakened by SCOTUS

[OSR stands with Israel]

Wouldn’t it just permit states to ban it at 15 weeks if they rule this constitutional

[OSR stands with Israel]

Dule , shouldn’t you as a libertarian support the individual states right to pass their own abortion laws

[OSR stands with Israel]

Dule , shouldn’t you as a libertarian support the individual states right to pass their own abortion laws

I'm torn. I do believe that Roe was poorly decided (as lfromnj noted), and I understand that whatever threshold the law establishes for "personhood" will be fundamentally arbitrary on some level (not unlike the age of consent). However, Blairite is also right in noting that libertarians should not endorse any government taking away people's rights, whether that is a federal, state, or local government. In fact, smaller governments are often more prone to wild reactionary conservatism than the federal government, so in some ways I trust them less to preserve people's rights.

That said, I am ok with certain states passing certain abortion restrictions-- but the idea that a zygote is equivalent to a living person is fundamentally insane and any attempt to legislate to that effect should be resisted. I personally think the cutoff for abortion should come when the fetus becomes viable, but unlike certain people, I understand that there is no exact moment when a fetus becomes a person. Personhood isn't something that happens in a split second. It is a gradient scale, and while either end of that gradient is clearly defined, there is no naturally occurring delineation in between that we can use as a basis for legislation.

My opinion is states shouldnt have the right to ban abortions without the basic exceptions and also not have a the right to pass the type of laws Virginia tried to pass in 2019 either. I think both of those would violate the constitution.

Other than that I think states should have the constitutional power to do what they want

[OSR stands with Israel]

Dule , shouldn’t you as a libertarian support the individual states right to pass their own abortion laws

States rights is not a libertarian position at all. Almost all values are unverbalizable and I can't see why any principled libertarian would be okay with a government making a tyrannical decision just because it exists below the federal level.

Isnt American libertarianism basically the types that take the interpretation of : if something isn't explicitly written in the constitution , than the federal government should have no power to make laws or regulations about it.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Dule , shouldn’t you as a libertarian support the individual states right to pass their own abortion laws

States rights is not a libertarian position at all. Almost all values are unverbalizable and I can't see why any principled libertarian would be okay with a government making a tyrannical decision just because it exists below the federal level.

Isnt American libertarianism basically the types that take the interpretation of : if something isn't explicitly written in the constitution , than the federal government should have no power to make laws or regulations about it.

That would be a very reductionist way of interpreting their motivations.

That was basically how I believe  Ron Paul described it and he was basically the face of American libertarianism for decades

[OSR stands with Israel]

Dule , shouldn’t you as a libertarian support the individual states right to pass their own abortion laws

By the same logic, shouldn't a libertarian support a state's right to abrogate the First Amendment? No, obviously, almost all of us, of any ideological disposition, hold certain principles above federalism. 

Nope,  cause the first amendment is clearly written in the constitution so even by Ron Paul interpretation of the constitution, the states wouldn’t have powers to limit speech