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

[7,052,770]

Only people who voted for Hillary Clinton on 11/8/2016 get to complain if they overturn Roe v. Wade.

[7,052,770]

I'm honestly increasingly beginning to believe this is a good thing. It would drive D turnout up and R turnout down for the midterms.

And the women unable to get abortions in the meantime are just collateral damage?

[7,052,770]

I'm honestly increasingly beginning to believe this is a good thing. It would drive D turnout up and R turnout down for the midterms.

And the women unable to get abortions in the meantime are just collateral damage?

Which will do more long-term damage to the country? A few months of abortion being harder to get, or Republicans winning big in 2022?

Surely after 2010 we should all know the answer by now.

It's going to be a lot longer than 3 months. It's not like a 55-47 senate or whatever can just overrule a Supreme Court decision. It will be years if not decades before abortion has a chance to become legal in every state again,  basically waiting to appoint enough justices to the Supreme Court who are willing to reverse the new precedent and getting the right case in front of them.

[7,052,770]

I'm honestly increasingly beginning to believe this is a good thing. It would drive D turnout up and R turnout down for the midterms.

And the women unable to get abortions in the meantime are just collateral damage?

But people keep on telling me that abortion bans have no affect on the rate of abortion!

No they don't?

As you know, there is a huge difference between "a ban won't reduce them to 0" and "a ban won't reduce them at all from their current rate."

[7,052,770]

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

It's totally up to the justices. They can do anything they want, ranging from making all abortion illegal everywhere, to overturning all restrictions whatsoever anywhere.

I think they likely allow this 15-week ban, which would be an overturn of Roe. Whether they allow bans to go further is anyone's guess, but there sure will be a lot of pressure on these judges, several of whom were handpicked as being likely to go that far.

Elections have consequences. I wish Democrats grasped that like Republicans do.

[7,052,770]

I think cert was granted because there were already four votes to hear the case with Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Barrett. It’s possible Kavanaugh could have been the sixth vote to deny cert if Ginsburg were still alive.

Would Kavanaugh becoming a feminist icon as the deciding vote to uphold Roe be the most ironic twist in American political history?

[7,052,770]

I think cert was granted because there were already four votes to hear the case with Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Barrett. It’s possible Kavanaugh could have been the sixth vote to deny cert if Ginsburg were still alive.

Would Kavanaugh becoming a feminist icon as the deciding vote to uphold Roe be the most ironic twist in American political history?

I didn’t mean that. I meant he might have been a sixth vote to deny cert just to avoid hearing an abortion case for now.

I mean it though. He's probably the deciding vote on this case and may single handedly let US abortion policy for a generation or more.

[7,052,770]

GA HB481 was ruled unconstitutional last year.

We can hope that cooler heads will prevail if Roe is overturned, but I fear we will go to a very dark and draconian place as a country if the anti-abortion crusaders are validated by the Supreme Court.

People who truly believe abortion is murder aren't going to stop with "Ok, we've banned it in our states, so the issue is settled." They're going to ban it everywhere, reduce the acceptable exceptions, and prevent people from travelling to other places to get one. And in fairness, why wouldn't they? If abortion really is murder, that's the only reasonable course of action.

[7,052,770]

I'm not great on the legalese surrounding Roe and Casey, but it seems like the best the pro-lifers can hope for here is not to allow states to outright ban abortion, and certainly not to outright ban abortion nation-wide, but to allow for Mississippi's 15 week timeframe. I don't see what legal justification they could give for that that wasn't "we don't like abortion, so 15 weeks is cool, we guess." Is there an actual specific constitutional question that's being looked at here?

Also, if anyone is familiar with the Mississippi law, how do they determine 15 weeks as a limit when dates of conception are notoriously hard to establish? Is it based on development of the fetus, or just a "best guess"? If the latter, seems like it's already on shaky ground to begin with and women could just say "yeah, I'm only 14 weeks pregnant" for edge cases.

My understanding is that it's by the best professional judgment of the doctors at the only remaining clinic in Mississippi, and that clinic lives on pins and needles of getting shut down over a technicality at any moment and doesn't push it.

[7,052,770]

What do you think the abortion map will look like the first cycle after Dobbs v. Jackson?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_state_legislatures#Party_summary

Possible exceptions are Pennsylvania and Michigan, and with the obvious caveat that the map could change if state legislative control changes. But expect every Republican legislature to ban up to the extent allowed.

[7,052,770]

If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016, this is on you.

If HRC won in 2016, Rs might have a Filibuster Proof Senate Majority.

Anything "might" be true, but we can be pretty sure that Republicans wouldn't hold a 6-3 majority.

[7,052,770]

If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016, this is on you.

If HRC won in 2016, Rs might have a Filibuster Proof Senate Majority.

Anything "might" be true, but we can be pretty sure that Republicans wouldn't hold a 6-3 majority.

They were talking about holding Scalia's seat open another 4 years if Hillary won, so there's a good chance a Republican would be filling Scalia and RBG's seats now and Kennedy would be retiring soon.

Like I said, anything "might" be true.

[7,052,770]

A wild "banning abortion will do nothing to stop abortions" appears!

https://rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2018/10/04/stop-saying-that-making-abortion-illegal-doesnt-stop-them/

Did you even read the article? It says abortion bans reduce abortions by half to 2/3, depending on the country and study.

No, it doesn't stop them completely, but no one has ever said they'll "do nothing"

[7,052,770]

A wild "banning abortion will do nothing to stop abortions" appears!

https://rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2018/10/04/stop-saying-that-making-abortion-illegal-doesnt-stop-them/

Did you even read the article? It says abortion bans reduce abortions by half to 2/3, depending on the country and study.

No, it doesn't stop them completely, but no one has ever said they'll "do nothing"

The exact words of KhanOfKans are "banning abortion will do nothing to stop abortions, it just means they'll be done unsafely, which makes death or injury to the mother more likely."

Well I guess I expected people to realize I wasn't meaning to literally cover all of human history when I said "no one has ever said..."

Obviously, as evidenced by the very article he linked, abortion rates will go down some, just not to 0. I don't think any relevant figures on the pro-choice side (not just talking about message board anonymos) are alleging the rate will stay the same

[7,052,770]

Well Murder law's don't stop all murder, time to repeal them all!

To harry: That's basically what you are arguing. Find and use another argument to defend the pro choice perspective.

I think you, uh, totally misread what I'm saying...

[7,052,770]

The point is that some people can’t emphasize with the notion that you are a parent immediately after having unprotected sex. Should this be a responsibility issue? Sure. If we go the right way about it but it’s just really silly to me that someone who swears to God that there’s only two genders, not just two sexes (even if that’s even qualified by chromosomal disorders that people like this tend to forget about unless they are found in a fetus), wants us to believe that a being that hasn’t even consummated into a pregnancy yet needs a social security number simply because it’s metabolizing and has human DNA.

”Hasn’t even consummated into a pregnancy yet”? Do you think abortions happen before pregnancy?

Only around half of fertilized eggs even implant into a uterus. Birth control pills may lower those odds, it hasn't been proven, but their primary purpose is to stop ovulation altogether, so it would be basically impossible to test this idea.