SCOTUS overturns Roe megathread (pg 53 - confirmed)

[Sir Mohamed]

I can see this drastically altering the midterms.

There may well be a red wave but it will be extremely blunted now. If we don’t go into recession…if inflation is no longer a big issue…we could actually see a blue wave.

Not sure about this. Of course, pretty much anybody has a strong opinion on abortion in this country, though the issue itsself doesn't affect a huge number of people. I fail to see how many people change their vote because of it. If anything, it may help Dems turning out their base. The question is just how much that affects the overall fundamentals, which are not that great with a D prez in low 40s approval territory.

Also, the midterms won't happen till November, and a lot more can happen in between.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Just a few examples off the top of my head where the court literally just made stuff up to reach the outcome the left wanted:

Moore v East Cleveland

An East Cleveland, Ohio zoning ordinance that prohibited a grandmother from living with her grandchild was unconstitutional

Reynolds v Sims

State senate districts must have roughly equal populations based on the principle of "one person, one vote".

Gideon v Wainwright

The Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires U.S. states to provide attorneys to criminal defendants who are unable to afford their own.

Miranda v AZ

The Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination requires law enforcement officials to advise a suspect interrogated in custody of their rights to remain silent and to obtain an attorney, at no charge if need be. Supreme Court of Arizona reversed and remanded.

Griswold v CT

A Connecticut law criminalizing the use of contraceptives violated the right to marital privacy. Connecticut Supreme Court reversed.

Eisenstadt v. Baird

The US Supreme Court that established the right of unmarried people to possess contraception on the same basis as married couples.

Jacobellis v. OH

The First Amendment, as applied through the Fourteenth, protected a movie theater manager from being prosecuted for possessing and showing a film that was not obscene.

Lemon v. Kurtzman

For a law to be considered constitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, the law must (1) have a legitimate secular purpose, (2) not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion, and (3) not result in an excessive entanglement of government and religion.

Okay what non-fascist reasons do you have for opposing these obviously good rulings?

Like wow, you are WAY further right than I thought you'd be.

     It's obvious from context that Mr. Reactionary is talking about legal justifications for these rulings and not whether the outcomes constitute good policies in themselves. He isn't claiming that grandparents and grandchildren should be prohibited from living together.

But how is a law preventing them from living together constitutional

     I'm not saying I agree with Mr. Reactionary; just that his point is being massively misrepresented.

[Torie]

What a sad day for this country. I shudder to think about what's next. Will the Court overturn marriage equality? I assume that will be the next challenge, if it isn't already in the works.

Same sex relations, contraception, school integration,

And maybe the economic issues as well, social security, Medicare,


The whole new deal paradigm is at risk.

Right. I am worried contraception is what will be targeted next. Clarence Thomas essentially said in his opinion that the court should re-examine the landmark cases that established the right to contraception, right to same sex marriage and right to same sex intimacy.

This really is a frightening time.

Thomas is an outlyier on that (he hates substantive due process), and Kavanaugh's concurrence said no. I can't image a national law being passed banning 1st trimester abortions btw.

Like I said above, I give it six months max before they do it.

Biden won't veto it, and the Senate Dems won't filibuster it?  Calm down.

[lfromnj]

It's time for Democrats to play hardball; we can't keep being the nice guys while the GOP goes full Gilead.

We need to start funding programs to mail any woman who needs it contraceptive pills in red and blue states, free of charge.

Blue states need to pass amnesty laws that any woman who is prosecuted for exercising her reproductive rights will be protected in blue states.

Democratic Presidents must forthrightly lay out the case to the American people for the deterioration of the judicial branch since the Garland fiasco and go full Jackson. Weekly addresses if necessary.

How do you go Jackson on a decision that says the people’s elected representatives are the ones who will decide abortion law

The people have been robbed of their elected representatives.

The Republican Party's gerrymandering has stolen the ability of non-conservative voters to win legislative majorities when they make up a majority.

Wisconsin Assembly in 2018: Democrats won the popular vote by 8.24%. Republicans won 63 out of 100 seats. That majority was stolen by your party, with your consent. That legislature is supposed to reflect and enact the will of the people of Wisconsin?

Republican Supremes hand power to states where it is impossible for Republicans to lose power and pretend it is democracy. You clearly don't give a damn about liberty so long as you get your way.

Thieves and liars bringing the country to a violent boil rather than accept America's democracy.

They won by 1% not 8%

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Giant middle finger to every Trump supporter. The same to anyone who didn’t vote for Hillary.

You are responsible for this, even if you are pro-choice.

Buddy, why do you think we supported Trump? Of course we're responsible for this. We wanted this.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

FWIW Clarence Thomas saying "we should also overturn these other decisions that I dissented in" is hardly surprising or out of character for him. Most justices consider that sort of thing to be poor form and they try to address only the case at hand but he's never cared.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

It's time for Democrats to play hardball; we can't keep being the nice guys while the GOP goes full Gilead.

We need to start funding programs to mail any woman who needs it contraceptive pills in red and blue states, free of charge.

Blue states need to pass amnesty laws that any woman who is prosecuted for exercising her reproductive rights will be protected in blue states.

Democratic Presidents must forthrightly lay out the case to the American people for the deterioration of the judicial branch since the Garland fiasco and go full Jackson. Weekly addresses if necessary.

How do you go Jackson on a decision that says the people’s elected representatives are the ones who will decide abortion law

The people have been robbed of their elected representatives.

The Republican Party's gerrymandering has stolen the ability of non-conservative voters to win legislative majorities when they make up a majority.

Wisconsin Assembly in 2018: Democrats won the popular vote by 8.24%. Republicans won 63 out of 100 seats. That majority was stolen by your party, with your consent. That legislature is supposed to reflect and enact the will of the people of Wisconsin?

Republican Supremes hand power to states where it is impossible for Republicans to lose power and pretend it is democracy. You clearly don't give a damn about liberty so long as you get your way.

Thieves and liars bringing the country to a violent boil rather than accept America's democracy.

They won by 1% not 8%

Also, if it's undemocratic for Republicans to win 63% of the seats in Wisconsin in 2018 while losing the popular vote, then why is it not also undemocratic for Democrats to win 62% of the seats in Nevada in 2020 while losing the popular vote by 5 points? Why is it undemocratic when geographic distribution favors Republicans, but not when it favors Democrats?

[Mr. Reactionary]

We are increasingly living under a right-wing judicial dictatorship, and we need to treat that as the crisis that it is.

Lol so returning this decision to the people’s elected representatives is dictatorship

They get to experience what conservatives felt in the 1960s and 1970s when the then-awful Supreme Court just made stuff up.

Beyond Roe, what cases are you referring to?

Just a few examples off the top of my head where the court literally just made stuff up to reach the outcome the left wanted:

Moore v East Cleveland
Regents v Bakke
Reynolds v Sims
Gideon v Wainwright
Miranda v AZ
Griswold v CT
Eisenstadt v. Baird
Jacobellis v. OH
Lemon v. Kurtzman

How is Moore and Jacobellis particularly bad decisions

There is no substantive due process right in the Constitution to override a zoning limitation on school enrollment, which is what that case was about.

In Jacobellis the activist court abandoned the long understood "community standard" prong for obscenity, and basically created this fictional, nebulous nationwide community standard that basically opens the floodgates to pornography that had been long held to be outside the 1st amendment. That Alabama and San Francisco are said to have the same community standard is ridiculous and upends hundreds of years of precedent.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

Love people going mask off in this thread, it's about pushing society back 50 years.

[jamestroll]

It's time for Democrats to play hardball; we can't keep being the nice guys while the GOP goes full Gilead.

We need to start funding programs to mail any woman who needs it contraceptive pills in red and blue states, free of charge.

Blue states need to pass amnesty laws that any woman who is prosecuted for exercising her reproductive rights will be protected in blue states.

Democratic Presidents must forthrightly lay out the case to the American people for the deterioration of the judicial branch since the Garland fiasco and go full Jackson. Weekly addresses if necessary.

How do you go Jackson on a decision that says the people’s elected representatives are the ones who will decide abortion law

The people have been robbed of their elected representatives.

The Republican Party's gerrymandering has stolen the ability of non-conservative voters to win legislative majorities when they make up a majority.

Wisconsin Assembly in 2018: Democrats won the popular vote by 8.24%. Republicans won 63 out of 100 seats. That majority was stolen by your party, with your consent. That legislature is supposed to reflect and enact the will of the people of Wisconsin?

Republican Supremes hand power to states where it is impossible for Republicans to lose power and pretend it is democracy. You clearly don't give a damn about liberty so long as you get your way.

Thieves and liars bringing the country to a violent boil rather than accept America's democracy.

They won by 1% not 8%

Also, if it's undemocratic for Republicans to win 63% of the seats in Wisconsin in 2018 while losing the popular vote, then why is it not also undemocratic for Democrats to win 62% of the seats in Nevada in 2020 while losing the popular vote by 5 points? Why is it undemocratic when geographic distribution favors Republicans, but not when it favors Democrats?

it is bad either way.

and I have credibility in bashing gerrymandering. I long bashed it no matter who does it.

[GP270watch]

It's also maddening to see so many people on social media today proposing all sorts of wacky plans to try to fix this.  The only plan that doesn't seem to enter people's minds?  Voting.  That's how Republicans did this.  They showed up, consistently, without bitching or complaining or demanding a bribe, for decades, voting to overturn Roe.  Meanwhile Democratic voters constantly have to be coddled and cajoled and bribed into turning out every two years and then whine incessantly about how much voting sucks.  Even Democratic thought leaders and activists talk constantly about how much the party sucks and how worthless voting is.  Know who doesn't do that?  Republicans.  They just vote.  And when they vote they win.  And when they win, they get to appoint judges who do what they want.  You never hear about Republicans wanting to pack the court or do some wacky complicated House of Cards plan to get their agenda through.  Because they understand that just voting consistently is enough to get most of that they want.

 Bro, Trump just tried to steal an election WTF are you babbling about? Republican would absolutely pack the court if they saw it was their only recourse. McConnell knows the Senate math favors them. What he did with Garland/Gorsuch was a wacky scheme. You are talking absolute nonsense as always. Democrats do vote we win elections and then get weak politicians like Biden who just basically said he has no executive power to fight this bad decision which is bullsh**t. Biden can offer Federal pardons for all women traveling to get an abortion or who receive abortion drugs in the mail and could have stated that in his speech today. The Attorney General can also bring suit against states violating civil rights. Even if it ends up being heard by Republican dominated courts, the Democrats have to fight, including fighting bad state laws with every ounce of federal power.

All you have are impotent, stupid, symbolic ideas that have no chance of actually changing anything.  You know that won't work, but they're a weapon you can use to direct your outrage at Biden and the Democrats.  Anything to avoid blaming Republicans.  Anything to avoid having the solution be something as breathtakingly lame as "organize, donate and vote for Democrats." No no, you see, we could totally protect abortion with this one weird trick but Biden won't do it because he's too weak and stupid and/or secretly pro-life.

 I always blame Republicans first while many fake Democrats have been naive about what was about to happen. I criticize Biden because he deserves criticism. Telling people essentially to vote in November is weak. We voted in 2020 for Biden, the House, and the Senate. The GOP has done more with less than what Democratic Party voters have delivered. You are the one who constantly mocks the actual Democratic base in favor of ineffective politicians and the establishment. FDR was powerful because he was led by the Progressive movement and expanded on their gains in the states and he used a bulldozer wherever he had the opportunity to do so and all that happened was that he got more and more politcal momentum.

 Democrats are voting and trying to give everyone the opportunity to vote. Republcians are making voting an obstacle, hate the idea of one person/one vote, and increasingly in places they're in power they are casting doubts on election results and refusing to certify elections, see New Mexico.

 Biden has executive pardon power, he can pardon against any Federal conviction and has the entire Federal government to protect women's civil rights. If you don't even use the power you have how is that a convincing argument to voters, "well what I actually need is more campaign money and more power". Especially when the GOP is literally denying results of elections. You don't fully understand what's happening.

[GeorgiaModerate]

FWIW Clarence Thomas saying "we should also overturn these other decisions that I dissented in" is hardly surprising or out of character for him. Most justices consider that sort of thing to be poor form and they try to address only the case at hand but he's never cared.

You'll notice he didn't mention Loving v. Virginia.  I wonder why not...

[jojoju1998]

FWIW Clarence Thomas saying "we should also overturn these other decisions that I dissented in" is hardly surprising or out of character for him. Most justices consider that sort of thing to be poor form and they try to address only the case at hand but he's never cared.

You'll notice he didn't mention Loving v. Virginia.  I wonder why not...

Either way;

These supreme court decisions are creating a slipperly slope.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

FWIW Clarence Thomas saying "we should also overturn these other decisions that I dissented in" is hardly surprising or out of character for him. Most justices consider that sort of thing to be poor form and they try to address only the case at hand but he's never cared.

You'll notice he didn't mention Loving v. Virginia.  I wonder why not...

Because the basis of that was the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and not the "right to privacy". It's not really a related case at all.

[Alben Barkley]

It appears Kentucky had an IMMEDIATE trigger ban, so wow, it's already illegal here.

[Sir Mohamed]

FWIW Clarence Thomas saying "we should also overturn these other decisions that I dissented in" is hardly surprising or out of character for him. Most justices consider that sort of thing to be poor form and they try to address only the case at hand but he's never cared.

Just proves that he's less of a justice and more of a right-wing partisan hack. But right-wingers keep whining about "liberal justices aiming to legislate from the bench." Yup, sure.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It appears Kentucky had an IMMEDIATE trigger ban, so wow, it's already illegal here.

Yikes I didn't take into account there's states like that. And where's the closest state that'll remain legal? Illinois I guess is the obvious answer but I doubt there's any clinics performing that nearby, you'd probably have to go somewhere like Champaign which is still a 3 1/2 hour drive.

[jamestroll]

It's time for Democrats to play hardball; we can't keep being the nice guys while the GOP goes full Gilead.

We need to start funding programs to mail any woman who needs it contraceptive pills in red and blue states, free of charge.

Blue states need to pass amnesty laws that any woman who is prosecuted for exercising her reproductive rights will be protected in blue states.

Democratic Presidents must forthrightly lay out the case to the American people for the deterioration of the judicial branch since the Garland fiasco and go full Jackson. Weekly addresses if necessary.

How do you go Jackson on a decision that says the people’s elected representatives are the ones who will decide abortion law

The people have been robbed of their elected representatives.

The Republican Party's gerrymandering has stolen the ability of non-conservative voters to win legislative majorities when they make up a majority.

Wisconsin Assembly in 2018: Democrats won the popular vote by 8.24%. Republicans won 63 out of 100 seats. That majority was stolen by your party, with your consent. That legislature is supposed to reflect and enact the will of the people of Wisconsin?

Republican Supremes hand power to states where it is impossible for Republicans to lose power and pretend it is democracy. You clearly don't give a damn about liberty so long as you get your way.

Thieves and liars bringing the country to a violent boil rather than accept America's democracy.

They won by 1% not 8%

Also, if it's undemocratic for Republicans to win 63% of the seats in Wisconsin in 2018 while losing the popular vote, then why is it not also undemocratic for Democrats to win 62% of the seats in Nevada in 2020 while losing the popular vote by 5 points? Why is it undemocratic when geographic distribution favors Republicans, but not when it favors Democrats?

it is bad either ING WAY

and I have credibility in bashing gerrymandering. I long bashed it no matter who does it.

On gerrymandering, I understand you may have to gerrymander (ironically) to create like a GOP seat in Massachusetts .. but for the most part I just favor policies that draw districts of equal population that make geographic sense. it should balance out nationally.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

FWIW Clarence Thomas saying "we should also overturn these other decisions that I dissented in" is hardly surprising or out of character for him. Most justices consider that sort of thing to be poor form and they try to address only the case at hand but he's never cared.

Just proves that he's less of a justice and more of a right-wing partisan hack. But right-wingers keep whining about "liberal justices aiming to legislate from the bench." Yup, sure.

I mean he's no doubt the second most partisan justice ever to be on the court, and the only reason he's not the first is Alito is there.

[Sol]

It appears Kentucky had an IMMEDIATE trigger ban, so wow, it's already illegal here.

Yikes I didn't take into account there's states like that. And where's the closest state that'll remain legal? Illinois I guess is the obvious answer but I doubt there's any clinics performing that nearby, you'd probably have to go somewhere like Champaign which is still a 3 1/2 hour drive.

Southern Illinois is the closest place with legal abortion for much of the Mississippi Valley, so I wouldn't be surprised if one pops up in Cairo, St. Louis burbs, or Carbondale. Probably the clinics in the St. Louis will just move over the border like the one in Fargo is planning to do.

[Alben Barkley]

It appears Kentucky had an IMMEDIATE trigger ban, so wow, it's already illegal here.

Yikes I didn't take into account there's states like that. And where's the closest state that'll remain legal? Illinois I guess is the obvious answer but I doubt there's any clinics performing that nearby, you'd probably have to go somewhere like Champaign which is still a 3 1/2 hour drive.

It appears there are a couple in southern Illinois but still quite a drive. Already I think we were down to just one in Louisville but I guess that's gone now.

Looks like there's some in southwestern Virginia though for those in the eastern part of the state.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

FWIW Clarence Thomas saying "we should also overturn these other decisions that I dissented in" is hardly surprising or out of character for him. Most justices consider that sort of thing to be poor form and they try to address only the case at hand but he's never cared.

You'll notice he didn't mention Loving v. Virginia.  I wonder why not...

Because the basis of that was the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and not the "right to privacy". It's not really a related case at all.

Mind-boggling that anyone would seriously entertain the idea Clarence Thomas, happily married to his white wife, would ever seriously propose the reversal of Loving vs Virginia. It's an utterly hysterical suggestion.

[Alben Barkley]

Director of "Pro-Life Democrats" on CNN.

Is this like "Log Cabin Republicans?"

[jojoju1998]

FWIW Clarence Thomas saying "we should also overturn these other decisions that I dissented in" is hardly surprising or out of character for him. Most justices consider that sort of thing to be poor form and they try to address only the case at hand but he's never cared.

You'll notice he didn't mention Loving v. Virginia.  I wonder why not...

Because the basis of that was the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and not the "right to privacy". It's not really a related case at all.

Mind-boggling that anyone would seriously entertain the idea Clarence Thomas, happily married to his white wife, would ever seriously propose the reversal of Loving vs Virginia. It's an utterly hysterical suggestion.

Yeah but it's a slipperly slope.

If abortion is not in the consitution... then so.....

[7,052,770]

The closest one to central Mississippi will be ... Kansas? Mexico? Maybe Atlanta for now?