President Biden promises to sign Roe codification in Jan 2023 if Dems win

[Pericles]

Biden promises Roe codfication WILL happen

This is a clear message to Democratic voters. Biden also set an ambitious deadline for it, saying he will sign federal protections for abortion rights in January. He also promised to pass an assault weapons ban, at some unspecified time in the same Congress. This pledge presumably means he has committed Democrats to repealing the filibuster, at least for the abortion bill. At the moment, Democrats have around a 20% chance of winning both a majority in the House and at least 52 Senators (538 forecast). If Democrats do win the House but can't beat Ron Johnson, then I expect he'd keep governing through reconciliation bills and many voters would feel (unfairly) that Biden broke his promise, but that would be a nice problem to have.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Which Joe Manchin is going to be voting?

[Farmlands]

Joe Manchin isn't going to repeal a fillibuster to codify Roe, if he didn't do it for a quite more palatable and less up stirring voting rights bill. It makes no sense. This is just a plain attempt to still somewhat salvage these midterms by Biden.

[soundchaser]

This is precluded on the idea that Democrats flip at least one seat to eliminate the filibuster, which has been Biden's messaging for months now.

[John Dule]

Unconstitutional, though it's not like that's anything new.

[soundchaser]

Unconstitutional, though it's not like that's anything new.

How would it be unconstitutional? The whole thrust of Dobbs is that the Constitution is (supposedly) silent on the issue of abortion.

[Hermit For Peace]

Which Joe Manchin is going to be voting?

LOL!

[Woody]

"Wait, but why don't you do it now?"

[Calthrina950]

Unconstitutional, though it's not like that's anything new.

How would it be unconstitutional? The whole thrust of Dobbs is that the Constitution is (supposedly) silent on the issue of abortion.

Dobbs left the issue of abortion to the states. That is the primary premise of it.

[citizenZ]

This idea that people will pay $6 for a jar of mayonnaise to codify Roe is going to be looked back at with laughter after November.

[brucejoel99]

Unconstitutional, though it's not like that's anything new.

How would it be unconstitutional? The whole thrust of Dobbs is that the Constitution is (supposedly) silent on the issue of abortion.

Dobbs left the issue of abortion to the states. That is the primary premise of it.

Kavanaugh's whole concurrence was, notably, about leaving it to the people's elected representatives. Whether pro-life conservatives or libertarians such as John Dule like it or not, there are 5 votes on the current SCOTUS to uphold the WHPA just on the basis of the Lopez case's narrow interstate commerce grounds, the double-edged sword of that being that a national abortion ban is legally viable on the same grounds.

[jojoju1998]

Unconstitutional, though it's not like that's anything new.

How would it be unconstitutional? The whole thrust of Dobbs is that the Constitution is (supposedly) silent on the issue of abortion.

Dobbs left the issue of abortion to the states. That is the primary premise of it.

Well Kind of.

Here's the issue with the whole abortion thing.

The US doesn't have a national healthcare system of any kind. Why is this important ? Because most countries with a national healthcare system include abortion in their list of healthcare services, so it's pro forma. There's no debate around right to privacy, right to choose. It's a regulated healthcare service.

Here in the US; We don't have a national healthcare system; so especially in terms of Abortion; we get into these extremes and these theoretical arguments about choice, right to privacy, pro life, because there's no national healthcare service providing a regulated service aka abortion. So if Biden pushes for Roe Codification, he has to answer this question " Is Abortion a healthcare service ? And if so, should the state provide funding for all healthcare ? Because well.. slipperly slope. ".

[MR DARK BRANDON]

"Wait, but why don't you do it now?"

Two words. Joe Manchin

[John Dule]

Unconstitutional, though it's not like that's anything new.

How would it be unconstitutional? The whole thrust of Dobbs is that the Constitution is (supposedly) silent on the issue of abortion.

The Constitution gives Congress a limited number of powers and none of them can be used to accomplish this goal.

[Ferguson97]

This idea that people will pay $6 for a jar of mayonnaise to codify Roe is going to be looked back at with laughter after November.

The idea that a Republican Congress will reduce inflation is hilariously naive.

[Hammy]

This idea that people will pay $6 for a jar of mayonnaise to codify Roe is going to be looked back at with laughter after November.

If someone's entire vote centers around the cost of mayo, there's zero chance they were ever voting Democratic and that's just their fallback excuse

[gerritcole]

Unconstitutional, though it's not like that's anything new.

How would it be unconstitutional? The whole thrust of Dobbs is that the Constitution is (supposedly) silent on the issue of abortion.

The Constitution gives Congress a limited number of powers and none of them can be used to accomplish this goal.

Anything is interstate commerce if ya squint hard enough

[brucejoel99]

Worth noting, it can all be true that:

1.) Wickard & Gonzales are abominations, but;

2.) Even under the Court's narrower interstate commerce interpretations of the past 3 decades, the economic provision of abortion services easily qualifies under Rehnquist's Lopez reasoning as Congressionally-regulatable intrastate commerce that legitimately has a substantial affect on interstate commerce, which is important because;

3.) Dobbs explicitly didn't leave the legislative power to regulate abortion to the states alone but merely precluded recognition of a federal constitutional right to it, thus returning consideration of the matter to the people's elected representatives in general; that is, leaving the power to regulate abortion to the states only in the absence of preemption by any constitutional federal regulation legitimately within a Congressional purview, like interstate commerce (as was implied by the partial-birth abortion ban case taking for granted the legitimacy of the congressional power over the provision of the medical procedure due to its connection to interstate commerce).

[Mr. Reactionary]

1.) Wickard & Gonzales are abominations

[MarkD]

Is there going to be a push for overturning Dobbs and reinstating the original Roe principle as the prevailing interpretation of the Constitution if Democrats decide they need "backup" for WHPA? Can you imagine Biden or any other near-future Democratic nominee for Prez saying something along the line: "If Donald Trump can have a litmus test for his appointees to the SCOTUS -- he promised he'd appoint 'pro-life' judges who will overturn Roe, then we get to have a litmus test too. Our party promises to appoint pro-choice judges who will reinstate Roe (preferably Roe than Casey)." For months before Dobbs was handed down, I'd been thinking that the backlash to the ruling would include a pronounced effort to do this.

I wouldn't consider this to be "what's good for the goose is good for the gander," -- I'd think of much more like what's BAD for the goose is BAD for the gander -- but in today's "gotcha" politics and thirst for revenge, it wouldn't surprise me.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Abortion pills are just as common as birth control pills it's not needed because contraceptive is still lawful, so if the Rs have the H it's not a detrimental, Biden is gonna be investigated for Hunter Biden and Ds need to stop rooting for Ron Johnson he said if he is once again chairmanship he will call Hunter as a witness he couldn't do it in 2020 Biden wasn't Prez but this has nothing to do with me impeachment so so can care less neither party will ever have 67 votes to convict a sitting Prez but Clinton should of resigned Gore would of been the incumbent  very few Nadar votes would have been spoilers

Aborted fetus and embroyos are used for vaccines but they still can't cure HIV or Herpes, that's how they got the COVID shot so fast

[Earthling]

"Wait, but why don't you do it now?"

For the same reason that you did not leave this forum after making the big promise:

It can not be done now.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The saving grace is that many people are becoming Foster parents than becoming real parents to their own kids it's much easier to foster a child, it's not adopting because you get paid for Foster kids and you don't get paid for adopting mostly clergy like my pastor in 80s adopted 4 girls adopt kids whom have 50/100K a yr jobs part of the issue is that income inequality is so great it's easier to foster kids than having live births whether you are in a relationship or not

But even in the 80s with my pastor it is much easier to foster kids than having your own that's why rich people are doing it faster with Invitro fertility, Freddie Freeman did and Michael Jackson we don't know about the royals but they are worth 4B and Prince William is trying to have a 4th child if Freddie Freeman did it so can Royal's Invitro fertility

I always said abortion is an overblown issue the real issue is to get income inequality down after this Student Loan Discharge Sheila Jackson Lee wants to give blks reparations we can start having more kids and cap tuition, the environment and other things that we otherwise won't get under an RH and pass Voting Rights much more important than Abortion

Leader McCarthy and McConnell wants us to work 2 jobs and get no sleep to payback our student loans no Labor Shortage but Athletes can get Capita Gains and inheritance tax cuts, Bush W own no child left behind cut school lunches for kids and child care subsidy to give rich people Capital gains tax cuts and Inheritance tax cuts in 2004 did voters listen to that no