[Politico] Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Kermit Gosnell faints.

 

Slightly off. She argued for the equal protection interest of the Constitution, as women were held back from career advancement if they had babies 30 years ago. Things are better now, but I'm not familiar with the studies claiming how much quantifiably better. I doubt many of today's Justices would care about those studies anyways as facts aren't that important to them.

The 3 Constitutional connections that abortion rights legal scholars argue for are the Liberty interest (the right for a women not to be forced by the law to carry a pregnancy to term), the Privacy interests (original Roe) and Equal Protection interest (womens' careers). Once Amy "Pregnancy is piece of cake" Barrett became the swing vote, that Liberty interest argument flew out the window, lol.

 

bwahahaha, what a **** country....why are there "liberal" and "conservative" judges anyways? shouldn't they all be moderates/free thinkers?? lmao, estupidos

 

good points all, I was aiming for the granularity of reasoning demonstrated by a noted poster's statement, "No one gives a **** "

 

Viable fetal lungs are past the point of legal abortion, unless they were doing something weird or Ron Paul was exaggerating this ain’t a thing .

 

Will a Conservative Supreme Court Turn on Gay Rights After Dismantling Roe? Be a Skeptic
Gorsuch just penned an important pro-LGBT decision two years ago. Americans are largely not interested in relitigating this issue.

The belief that Roe v. Wade (1973) is set to be overturned, based on a leak of Justice Samuel Alito's draft opinion of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Monday, is leading to questions about whether other well-known court precedents are at stake, particularly on LGBT issues. Will a heavily conservative Supreme Court rethink Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 decision that made same-sex marriage recognition the law of the land? Would a conservative court go so far as to toss out Lawrence v. Texas, the 2003 decision that overruled state-level sodomy laws and essentially recognized a right to sexual autonomy and privacy among consenting adults?

When I say "leading to questions" here, I actually mean "somewhat panicky quick-hit analyses." To start with some clarity, while Alito's draft is authentic, we do not yet know whether other conservative justices have signed on to support this version.​

https://reason.com/2022/05/03/will-...ay-rights-after-dismantling-roe-be-a-skeptic/

 

I think the fears are somewhat misguided. In the context of the opinion, Alito is noting that those who are defending abortion rights are doing so by turning to more recent precedents because older precedents prior to Roe v. Wade are not helping make their case. That's the context of the Obergefell reference. And he notes that abortion is clearly different from these other rulings because "Abortion destroys what those decisions call 'potential life' and what the law at issue in this case regards as the life of an 'unborn human being.'"

Furthermore, his opinion leans heavily on the fact that Roe v. Wade has failed to actually resolve conflict about abortion, and citizenry, lawmakers, and the courts themselves remain polarized and divided about abortion regulation. The same is not true for gay marriage or LGBT issues in general, current culture-warring notwithstanding. Americans now support gay marriage recognition, while abortion remains as polarizing as ever.

While Alito may not agree with previous LGBT rulings from the court, this opinion is careful not to question their validity.​

 

Not if you ask DD...

 

Our Constitution is short, but complicated, and leaves room for a lot of interpretation. Mexico actually modeled their federalist constitution in 1824 after the US, but what Mexico and many modern Americans failed to recognize is that having simply a document is no guarantee for political stability. Subsequently, Mexico had multple revolutions, a takeover by France, dictatorships, and just turmoil. As imperfect as our system is, there is a place for conservative leaning, liberal leaning, and moderate judges in the system. I think it's simplistic to say they should all be free thinkers - that can still be true at the same time as having political or interpretive leanings.

 

Again you are taking a quote I made about Biden and applying it to RGB. Why are you doing this?

 

As in all issues, there is variation to this answer. The Texas legislature has had many opportunities to undo it's penal code, where gay sex (not straight sodomy) but only gay sex is considered a violation of the state law. So Texas, if some of our leaders had the power, would turn on gay rights.

 

This was not a viable fetus then (about 26 weeks) and would not be considered an abortion today so much as an extreme preterm. Even today preterms at 24 weeks (normally 40 for the non parents) have abysmal outcomes if they make it out of the NICU. Many more do today even some at late 23 weeks. But their lungs can be fibrotic from being on a ventilator and not having any lung surfactant, their eyes blind from oxygen therapy to stay alive, blood clots and lost vessels due central lines for antibiotics and other intravenous therapies. Their bowel can fail.

In all, a fetus belongs in the womb until about 38 weeks.

it would be like a pregnant woman miscarrying at 20 weeks. They would not abort necessarily but the fetus would soon die in spite of any medical interventions.

 

I think we all participate on this forum for recreation, it's something we do in our spare time. Plus I thought your response to @basso was pretty much out of line

 

I think RGB felt that Roe vs Wade failed to settle the issue and in fact lead to a lot of the division in this country. For me, this decision was inevitable given the direction of the conservative / Christian movement and their success in moving the political and judicial systems to the right over the last 20 some odd years.

I feel this will begin a new phase in American politics. Much of the narrative the past decade has been driven by the far right, and much of that centered around culture war issues such as abortion, gay and transgender rights, minority rights, "wokism" and so forth. At some point the right is bound to take a strong role across the board in gov't and dictate its agenda into law. The question will be how far it will go before there is a counter reaction.

Pendulums always swing - so long as we are a viable democracy.

 

Why was it out of line?

For your sake, I've changed my speech under your pressure to make you happy. Congrats, you've successfully used wokism on Clutchfans.

 

I actually care about the Harsanyi tweet of the NYT article about Joe Biden's long career of anti-abortion activism. So you are in essence calling me "no one," or a "nobody." And I am personally offended.

Actually I think the NYT article deserves its own thread.

 

Just anecdotal but in my life, when I've seen pro-life things organized, it has been rather heavily women.

You don't see the March-for-Life in Washington D.C. every year and think "Look at all those men"

Women are also more likely to be religious then men and this kind of goes hand in hand.