SCOTUS overturns Roe megathread (pg 53 - confirmed)

[GP270watch]

 Biden should have packed the court. We needed an FDR after Hoover figure because Trump was that bad, instead we got a geezer who has made nearly every wrong move. We heard "we can't pack the court because it would antagonize the conservatives" but some of us knew it didn't matter because they've been scheming since the rise of the so called "moral majority" to do exactly this, this very moment.

[DaleCooper]

I'm starting to change my mind on the leak, what's with the opposition to this? SCOTUS is the least accountable institution in the country, and I understand that's by design, but why are they entitled to strategically withholding information from the public? If they're too weak to make decisions and face the backlash, then they're too weak to be in this business. Americans have a right to know which rights are going to be taken away by unelected officials.

This is a cameras-in-courts level take.

I'm opposed to live televised hearings but I've never liked the ban on cameras in the Supreme Court. I understand not releasing the footage until the case has been heard, but refusing to give the public a look at what they do is creepy, but then again most of the Supreme Court's rituals are creepy and straight out of an occult fraternity.

[Sir Mohamed]

21 pages? LOL. How certain is this to be true? I'm still skeptical.

Anyways, great job by Susan Collins and puts a strain on RBG's legacy for not retiring in 2013.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

so I guess that's the legacy of an old lady with cancer deeming herself too important to retire in Obama's term huh

Didn't RBG object to Roe and think abortion was an Equal Protection thing?

Either way it might not have mattered, depending on when she retired; look at Garland.

There's a big difference between objecting to Roe because you think abortion is an equal protection thing and objecting to Roe because you think abortion just isn't a constitutional right. The former is what concurring opinions and obiter dicta are for.

[BGBC]

I'm starting to change my mind on the leak, what's with the opposition to this? SCOTUS is the least accountable institution in the country, and I understand that's by design, but why are they entitled to strategically withholding information from the public? If they're too weak to make decisions and face the backlash, then they're too weak to be in this business. Americans have a right to know which rights are going to be taken away by unelected officials.

This is a cameras-in-courts level take.

I'm opposed to live televised hearings but I've never liked the ban on cameras in the Supreme Court. I understand not releasing the footage until the case has been heard, but refusing to give the public a look at what they do is creepy, but then again most of the Supreme Court's rituals are creepy and straight out of an occult fraternity.

Jesus

[DaleCooper]

I'm starting to change my mind on the leak, what's with the opposition to this? SCOTUS is the least accountable institution in the country, and I understand that's by design, but why are they entitled to strategically withholding information from the public? If they're too weak to make decisions and face the backlash, then they're too weak to be in this business. Americans have a right to know which rights are going to be taken away by unelected officials.

This is a cameras-in-courts level take.

I'm opposed to live televised hearings but I've never liked the ban on cameras in the Supreme Court. I understand not releasing the footage until the case has been heard, but refusing to give the public a look at what they do is creepy, but then again most of the Supreme Court's rituals are creepy and straight out of an occult fraternity.

Jesus

The Supreme Court is very creepy, and the no-cameras-allowed thing is just one element of it. It's a bunch of elitist snobs in robes with lifetime appointments and no accountability. American politics hinging on waiting for elderly people to die is outrageously unacceptable and it's terrible for the country. I don't even give them much credit for most of their good decisions. They can overturn whatever they want so none of the rights they've granted to us in the past are safe, and a lot of their proper decisions were only necessary because they f-cked up in the first place.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Biden should have packed the court. We needed an FDR after Hoover figure because Trump was that bad, instead we got a geezer who has made nearly every wrong move. We heard "we can't pack the court because it would antagonize the conservatives" but some of us knew it didn't matter because they've been scheming since the rise of the so called "moral majority" to do exactly this, this very moment.

Look, we can't even get the Senate to eliminate the damn filibuster. How many congressmen do you think we have for packing the court?

If Ruchio and Shelby, where they've gone after the elections these people keep their jobs over, weren't going to motivate them, the plight of women who aren't rich enough to fly to New York to take care of these things isn't going to move them.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Also, the language he uses here around substantial due process would enable overturning Griswold and Oberfell too.

But, Hilary Clinton used an email server once, so it's not like we had a choice.

[Inmate Trump]

If you voted for Trump yet are not in favor of this decision, it’s still your fault.

You were warned.

[VBM]

Will this accelerate the population’s migration away from religion, as more and more people get fed up with these people shoving their religious beliefs down our throats?

Lol. Christians have been against killing the unborn since i was unborn and im 30.

I’m referring mainly to the on-the-fencers who identify as Christian, but don’t ever go to church and seem to identify as Christian just because they were told to be Christian when they were growing up

[politicallefty]

21 pages? LOL. How certain is this to be true? I'm still skeptical.

Quite a few clerks and others have read the draft opinion. It looks like a SCOTUS opinion and reads like an Alito opinion. Unless something massive happens before the end of June, this is the end of Roe and abortion as a constitutional right.

[afleitch]

Shame. Shame. Shame.

And the biggest shame towards those who hold 'pro-life' positions for expediency or just to feel good about themselves, who never once thought of the consequences of holding them, and who let the most egregious positions be taken, and state laws passed by pro-life advocates.

[Hammy]

I'm starting to change my mind on the leak, what's with the opposition to this? SCOTUS is the least accountable institution in the country, and I understand that's by design, but why are they entitled to strategically withholding information from the public? If they're too weak to make decisions and face the backlash, then they're too weak to be in this business. Americans have a right to know which rights are going to be taken away by unelected officials.

This is a cameras-in-courts level take.

Is that even such a crazy take for SCOTUS? Unlike criminal trials, where  the people whose fates are being decided are present in the courtroom and nothing is done in secret, this is not the case with SCOTUS, where the entire nation is impacted by their decisions.

[BGBC]

I'm starting to change my mind on the leak, what's with the opposition to this? SCOTUS is the least accountable institution in the country, and I understand that's by design, but why are they entitled to strategically withholding information from the public? If they're too weak to make decisions and face the backlash, then they're too weak to be in this business. Americans have a right to know which rights are going to be taken away by unelected officials.

This is a cameras-in-courts level take.

I'm opposed to live televised hearings but I've never liked the ban on cameras in the Supreme Court. I understand not releasing the footage until the case has been heard, but refusing to give the public a look at what they do is creepy, but then again most of the Supreme Court's rituals are creepy and straight out of an occult fraternity.

Jesus

The Supreme Court is very creepy, and the no-cameras-allowed thing is just one element of it. It's a bunch of elitist snobs in robes with lifetime appointments and no accountability. American politics hinging on waiting for elderly people to die is outrageously unacceptable and it's terrible for the country. I don't even give them much credit for most of their good decisions. They can overturn whatever they want so none of the rights they've granted to us in the past are safe, and a lot of their proper decisions were only necessary because they f-cked up in the first place.

I meant the part about surface-level legal traditions being like an “occult fraternity.” This is a really bizarre and awfully personal rant for a group of 9 people we really know nothing about. I would agree with you on the last point though; the only reason there is so much pressure on how the Court rules is because they opined these rights to begin with. You have to rip the bandaid off at some point, though.

[Inmate Trump]

21 pages? LOL. How certain is this to be true? I'm still skeptical.

Anyways, great job by Susan Collins and puts a strain on RBG's legacy for not retiring in 2013.

I know everyone loves her and I do too, but you can put some amount of blame on her for this happening.

[DaleCooper]

I'm starting to change my mind on the leak, what's with the opposition to this? SCOTUS is the least accountable institution in the country, and I understand that's by design, but why are they entitled to strategically withholding information from the public? If they're too weak to make decisions and face the backlash, then they're too weak to be in this business. Americans have a right to know which rights are going to be taken away by unelected officials.

This is a cameras-in-courts level take.

I'm opposed to live televised hearings but I've never liked the ban on cameras in the Supreme Court. I understand not releasing the footage until the case has been heard, but refusing to give the public a look at what they do is creepy, but then again most of the Supreme Court's rituals are creepy and straight out of an occult fraternity.

Jesus

The Supreme Court is very creepy, and the no-cameras-allowed thing is just one element of it. It's a bunch of elitist snobs in robes with lifetime appointments and no accountability. American politics hinging on waiting for elderly people to die is outrageously unacceptable and it's terrible for the country. I don't even give them much credit for most of their good decisions. They can overturn whatever they want so none of the rights they've granted to us in the past are safe, and a lot of their proper decisions were only necessary because they f-cked up in the first place.

I meant the part about surface-level legal traditions being like an “occult fraternity.” This is a really bizarre and awfully personal rant for a group of 9 people we really know nothing about. I would agree with you on the last point though; the only reason there is so much pressure on how the Court rules is because they opined these rights to begin with. You have to rip the bandaid off at some point, though.

I'm not talking about 9 people. I'm talking about the Supreme Court as an institution. I'll admit I'm a little more angry at it now, but I can assure you I've been opposed to it since before Trump was even an idea.

[Inmate Trump]

I still don’t know about packing the court…

But they should have term limits. No justice should be in there for life.

[Inmate Trump]

Serious hypothetical for Republicans:


Imagine your daughter/sister/mother is raped and she is forced to carry the baby to term. How do you feel?

[Pulaski]

so I guess that's the legacy of an old lady with cancer deeming herself too important to retire in Obama's term huh

Didn't RBG object to Roe and think abortion was an Equal Protection thing?

Either way it might not have mattered, depending on when she retired; look at Garland.

There's a big difference between objecting to Roe because you think abortion is an equal protection thing and objecting to Roe because you think abortion just isn't a constitutional right. The former is what concurring opinions and obiter dicta are for.

Oh I understand; I'm just saying that laying this at RBG's feet is not really warranted in either fashion.

[Pericles]

Biden should have packed the court. We needed an FDR after Hoover figure because Trump was that bad, instead we got a geezer who has made nearly every wrong move. We heard "we can't pack the court because it would antagonize the conservatives" but some of us knew it didn't matter because they've been scheming since the rise of the so called "moral majority" to do exactly this, this very moment.

After looking at what happened to Build Back Better and voting rights, how can you think that was Biden's choice to make? Either way, court packing would probably just make things even worse a few years later.

[Silent Hunter]

FDR dropped court packing after a backlash.

[Pericles]

One other thing-could they really not have gotten Barrett to write the opinion? It would look a bit better for them to have a woman be the one overturning Roe. Not that it makes a difference to the vast majority of abortion rights supporters, of course.

[MillennialModerate]

People think the Dems can hold the Senate.... (new here?)

Better chance of Manchin passing a federal abortion protections bill in the lame duck.

No chance because no one will break the fillibuster

Regardless Manchin is Anti-Choice. Collins and Murkowski might vote for it but not to break the fillibuster

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

People think the Dems can hold the Senate.... (new here?)

Better chance of Manchin passing a federal abortion protections bill in the lame duck.

No chance because no one will break the fillibuster

Regardless Manchin is Anti-Choice. Collins and Murkowski might vote for it but not to break the fillibuster

Manchin is whatever his backers need him to be.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

People think the Dems can hold the Senate.... (new here?)

Better chance of Manchin passing a federal abortion protections bill in the lame duck.

No chance because no one will break the fillibuster

Regardless Manchin is Anti-Choice. Collins and Murkowski might vote for it but not to break the fillibuster

Manchin is whatever his backers need him to be.

I would not be shocked if Manchin turned out to have quasi-moderate-hero personal stances on abortion, deep down. Though it's unlikely we'll ever know.