SCOTUS overturns Roe megathread (pg 53 - confirmed)

[lfromnj]

By the way is no one else going to discuss the fact that there was a leak at all?

Maybe its a liberal clerk trying to get Kavanaugh to face public pressure/bullying?

Maybe its Breyer?

[lfromnj]

At some point we need to start ignoring the courts.

Ignore what? SCOTUS is the one blocking any law restricting abortion? Are you saying just ignore abortion laws?  Is Joe Biden going to send in the feds to stop red states?

[lfromnj]

Abolish the Supreme Court.

Burn it to the ground, and then build it back up with 21st century democratic norms.

People are going to riot and they’ll be justified imo.

So legislatures getting to vote on whether abortion can be banned?

I love how Democrats have been so attached to the idea of "Democracy" over the past 2 years that anything they oppose is now anti "democratic"

[lfromnj]

Assuming this is legitimate, has there ever been such a leak from SCOTUS before?

Breyer was apparently so offended that his retirement was leaked that he almost went back on it. Also, over the past few years the outcomes of multiple cases have been correctly leaked, though I don't know about an entire opinion.

The answer to your question is probably 'no', no decision this important has been leaked, but rarely do decisions this important come around.

Didn't Breyer actually leak some minor case a few weeks ago?

[lfromnj]

https://twitter.com/njhochman/status/1521309945970532352?s=20&t=uhiHTpxdSbSI...

Average talk elections discourse.

[lfromnj]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/03/alito-roe-leaked-draft-disaster-for-supreme-court/

Keep in mind: Majorities, particularly in high-stakes cases such as the Mississippi abortion law at issue, can fall apart. We don’t know how Politico, which broke the story, obtained the draft. One theory — my leading theory — is that the leak came from the conservative side, possibly from a clerk for a conservative justice concerned that the seeming majority, ready to do away with the constitutional right to abortion, might be unraveling.

There was a hint of this last week in a Wall Street Journal editorial warning that Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. might be trying to dissuade Justices Brett M. Kavanaugh or Amy Coney Barrett from voting to overrule Roe outright. Roberts famously changed his mind after initially voting to strike down the Affordable Care Act in 2012 and “may be trying to turn another Justice now,” the Journal warned. “We hope he doesn’t succeed — for the good of the Court and the country.”

The Journal said its “guess” was that Alito was writing the majority opinion. Is it a coincidence that the Alito draft then leaked to Politico — or is it part of the same campaign to stave off a Kavanaugh or Barrett defection?

Of course, there are other possible culprits: a liberal clerk furious over the loss of abortion rights, perhaps? That makes less sense. Not much would be gained by leaking the draft of an outcome that has been expected since December’s oral argument in the Mississippi case, which involves a ban on most abortions after 15 weeks. Does anybody really think the reaction would change the conservative justices’ minds?

Conclusion: if a liberal did this, he's a dumbass. If a conservative did this, he's smart. Supreme Court clerks are usually smart.

Again we saw those students in Yale start screaming over a discussion, those same students later become clerks.

[lfromnj]

This is it. LGBTQ community is a next and after this they are coming for interracial marriage. All the white dudes with asian wives... lookout... you're next.

Imagine being this delusional

Then why are Republican Senators saying that Loving and Obergefell should be overturned?

Because Braun is a complete f[inks]ing moron who wasn't aware that the Loving decision was based on the 14th Amendment and not the right to privacy and is a completely seperate decision and backed down the next day after pointing this out.

The question is what state is actually going to ban interracial marriage this creating a challenge case that can go to the Supreme Court? Unlike abortion there has been zero push for this for decades. Are states just going to ban interracial marriage out of the blue despite its legality having >90% support and there being zero lobby of any type to ban it?

Honestly Braun is actually kinda like bronz when it comes to race. IIRC he had a few out of left field moments as well. He isn't even like MTG or anything , he's just literally weird. But yes you are right that Loving is based on the 14th and quite clear and there isn't really an argument against it.

[lfromnj]

This is it. LGBTQ community is a next and after this they are coming for interracial marriage. All the white dudes with asian wives... lookout... you're next.

Imagine being this delusional

Then why are Republican Senators saying that Loving and Obergefell should be overturned?

Because Braun is a complete f[inks]ing moron who wasn't aware that the Loving decision was based on the 14th Amendment and not the right to privacy and is a completely seperate decision and backed down the next day after pointing this out.

The question is what state is actually going to ban interracial marriage this creating a challenge case that can go to the Supreme Court? Unlike abortion there has been zero push for this for decades. Are states just going to ban interracial marriage out of the blue despite its legality having >90% support and there being zero lobby of any type to ban it?

Honestly Braun is actually kinda like bronz when it comes to race. IIRC he had a few out of left field moments as well. He isn't even like MTG or anything , he's just literally weird.

He's also not a lawyer, so it's not surprising he could be that ignorant about such precedent. Although my undergrad constitutional law class covered those cases and the reasonings, but he also went to college a long time before me.

Overall IMO its fair game for Democrats to pounce upon for Braun being a retard but people on this forum should know better than to actually think there will be an interracial marriage ban in any state in the future.

[lfromnj]

I'm not saying there's a huge appetite for it. I'm just saying that McConnell and a lot of Republicans probably have no problem with changing the law so that each state can make their own choice... even if that results in 50 states keeping it legal.

To be fair, is this really such a bad thing if all 50 states would keep it legal? That would not have been the case 50 years ago, and it shows how much social progress we've made as a country.

If you want to know a person's true nature, you give him the freedom to act. And the same is true for large groups of people (like the states). If we allow Alabama to ban interracial marriage, and it still chooses not to do so, I see that as a much bigger win for American ideals and democracy than Loving was.

Loving was decided correctly though.

[lfromnj]

If 50 states keep it legal, then that means no case challenging it even gets created and the whole thing is moot from the start.

I could see one or maybe two states challenging it now with only 41% public approval for the challenge (numbers you provided) but not challenging it 5 or 10 years from now or long term. Either way, IF it were to go to the Supreme Court, IF, I can see Republicans supporting it as "we believe in states rights but we also believe 45+ states want it legal now and it will be all 50 states in the future, but ultimately states rights are more important."

That was in 2000. Its been 20 years since then. It would easily be much higher today.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/354638/approval-interracial-marriage-new-high.aspx

Gallup and issue polling but its probably atleast 75 25 even in Alabama

[lfromnj]

https://mobile.twitter.com/ericswalwell/status/1522671337403265030

We have dules favorite congressman with the best takes folks.

[lfromnj]

https://twitter.com/DouglasKBlair/status/1523088909760024576?s=20&t=qZfy9dP9...

But why.

[lfromnj]

The person who "doxxed" Kavanaugh and organized the protest outside his house is his next-door neighbor. I don't think she broke any laws to find out where he lives.

In the past, a few of Wooten-Holway’s protests against Kavanaugh were mistakenly held in front of the wrong house. She wonders why no one on that street set her straight.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/05/07/wooten-holway-protest-justice-kavanaugh-neighbor/?msclkid=b0905522ceec11ec988594cb0d0c1d3b

[lfromnj]

https://twitter.com/AlexanderShur/status/1523320097993076737

[lfromnj]

I don't think we'd be hearing the same excuses if there was a screaming mob outside a liberal justice's house. There'd probably be a lot of "where are blue avatars to condemn this" instead.

I fully support their right to protest, but this is teetering on the edge of stability and can easily get dangerous with just one violent person.

I agree absolutely. But I wish you'd similarly condemn the insurrectionists on January 6.

Uh excuse me? Of course I condemn all violence. When they hell have I ever not?

And yeah guys, I was obviously at "the insurrection". Total Trump fanboy here, which is why I never voted for him. Deranged hacks.

To be fair there were actual people at the capitol who didn't vote .

[lfromnj]

I don't think we'd be hearing the same excuses if there was a screaming mob outside a liberal justice's house. There'd probably be a lot of "where are blue avatars to condemn this" instead.

I fully support their right to protest, but this is teetering on the edge of stability and can easily get dangerous with just one violent person.

I agree absolutely. But I wish you'd similarly condemn the insurrectionists on January 6.

Uh excuse me? Of course I condemn all violence. When they hell have I ever not?

And yeah guys, I was obviously at "the insurrection". Total Trump fanboy here, which is why I never voted for him. Deranged hacks.

To be fair there were actual people at the capitol who didn't vote .

Cool. I did vote and I've never been to any Trump rally, nontheless his Jan 6th one. In fact I've only attended one presidential rally in my life and that was Scott Walker's announcement in 2015 lol.

Yeah I was never accusing you, I sometimes just to post some fun "devil's advocate" stuff for the fun.

[lfromnj]

https://twitter.com/DouglasKBlair/status/1523095574156742657


The people who leaked this need to be arrested and throw in prison for years

Haha, it was organized by his neighbors.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1522966864342790144?s=21&t=sgln_SO...

In the past, a few of Wooten-Holway’s protests against Kavanaugh were mistakenly held in front of the wrong house. She wonders why no one on that street set her straight.

By one neighbor who invited a bunch of outsiders and didn't even know the correct house.

[lfromnj]

https://thehill.com/news/senate/3482047-senate-eyes-quick-passage-of-security-for-supreme-court-family-members/

Senate is planning on passing supreme court protection. Smart move.

[lfromnj]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/may/10/abortion-arson-attack-wisconsin-pro-choice-janes-revenge

[lfromnj]

Nope, SCOTUS trolls us by never releasing the big ones till the end of the term.

[lfromnj]

The most "moderate" Republican justice was always going to be fetishised by the pundit class and see higher approval ratings with the other side as a result, but there's a bit more to why Democratic voters have such a (relative) fondness for Roberts. He's a master of the meaningless civility politics so many PMC types crave:

https://twitter.com/stevenportnoy/status/1540338211699949569

He literally said he didn't want to overturn Roe v Casey. This was definitely a weird case because Roberts technically did vote with the majority but that was only for the MS law. What everyone was watching was Roe/Casey. Even if Roe was upheld with Kavanaugh I can guaruntee the pro choice movement wouild have focused on the fact they still "Lost" the case.

[lfromnj]

6-3? Lulz.

Elections have consequences, and that's what happened in 2016 in partiular.

Its 5-1-3. Roberts voted with the majority on the actual issue of the MS abortion ban but did not want to overturn Roe.

[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%

[lfromnj]

AG Garland: States can't ban FDA-approved abortion pills on safety grounds

I hope this holds true.

FYI it's likely that mailing abortion pills may be illegal.

[lfromnj]

https://twitter.com/crampell/status/1540383691280904192

Woke capitalism for the win?

A nice touch but people who work for JPMorgan Chase aren't really the people for whom such travel would be economically unviable.

? Bank Tellers are not that wealthy.