Is Roe V Wade going to be overturned?

[Piper]

@Jezcoe

Women who have lived with Roe being the standard all of their life are entering menopause…. But you know … this isn’t a long established norm like gay marriage.

It has always been questioned.

[Piper]

@tnt

I’m spoiled in thinking that a right that existed for 50 years, that well over 7-% of Americans support and that two nominees for the SC said they would not over turn, would not be overturned.

When did Conservatives have the majority on the SC that they could consider overturning Roe v Wade?

[Jezcoe]

@Piper

@Jezcoe

Women who have lived with Roe being the standard all of their life are entering menopause…. But you know … this isn’t a long established norm like gay marriage.

It has always been questioned.

It is a norm that has been upheld.

The current court was engineered by the Right with McConnell as their handmaiden to overturn 50 years of precedence.

The right won.

They should be happy.

[Samm]

@rp5x5

@Samm

@rp5x5

@PurpnGold

if the unborn is given personhood.

No one can do that, a baby is already a person. It’s time to stop the barbarity.

“Personhood” is a legal term. Under our law, it is bestowed at birth. It is not the same as “human” which applies from the moment of the first division of the fertilized ova.

There is a higher Law, which our “law” is based

That doesn’t change the fact that personhood is defined in law. In fact, personhood is a made up term to identify what the law defines. It’s immaterial to the issue of human life.

[PurpnGold]

@Jezcoe

The right won.

They should be happy.

But they must deflect to global inflation that Biden caused and that they have no plan for.

They are poo pooing a victory that was 50 years in the making to sky scream about temporary global inflation

[tnt]

@TheRedComet

Please stop comparing abortion to interracial marriage or hell race at all. It’s beyond offensive. Interracial marriage doesn’t involve anyone dying without due process.

There is a Pacific Ocean sized difference between the two.

There are other examples you could use to prove your point.

I was speaking legally.

Read the opinion.

It hinges upon the idea that any right not explicitly mentioned in the constitution (ie: abortion. Interracial marriage. gay marriage. Access to contraception) should be handled at the state level.

legally, there is no daylight between them.

[tnt]

@Piper

I don’t think they said that. Probably should check.

You know the saying: “When you think peace and safety ------- sudden destruction.”

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/03/politics/susan-collins-reaction-kavanaugh-gorsuch/index.html

“If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office,”

[tnt]

@Piper

When did Conservatives have the majority on the SC that they could consider overturning Roe v Wade?

What does that have to do with wether or not settled law should be overturned?

[PurpnGold]

@Samm

It’s immaterial to the issue of human life.

Well luckily for you, no one is disputing whether a zygote is a human life. When it comes to death of that life… the potential punishment is established in law.

[ohknow35]

@margaretms2

But it is remarkable to consider that the guy from The Apprentice chose a third of the Supreme Court.

The president??

Yeah, that’s a real head-scratcher how that worked out.

Wait until he picks a bunch more.

[Jezcoe]

@tnt

@TheRedComet

Please stop comparing abortion to interracial marriage or hell race at all. It’s beyond offensive. Interracial marriage doesn’t involve anyone dying without due process.

There is a Pacific Ocean sized difference between the two.

There are other examples you could use to prove your point.

I was speaking legally.

Read the opinion.

It hinges upon the idea that any right not explicitly mentioned in the constitution (ie: abortion. Interracial marriage. gay marriage. Access to contraception) should be handled at the state level.

legally, there is no daylight between them.

There is a reason that some Senators ask Judicial nominees if Brown V Board was decided correctly.

[tnt]

@PurpnGold

But they must deflect to global inflation that Biden caused and that they have no plan for.

They are poo pooing a victory that was 50 years in the making to sky scream about temporary global inflation

Except for the religious folks who sold themselves to establishment GOPers and then to a pro choice liberal democrat who paid for abortions, no one in the party ever wanted to overturn RvW.

It’s was their gravy train and their key to re-election.

[Call_me_Ishmael]

@Jezcoe

@zantax

The reason they are on the court is to uphold the constitution, and this is that.

Yeah. The judges that Trump appointed had nothing to do with overturning Roe.

Sure.

Elections have consequences.

[Samm]

@fallenturtle

@ohknow35

Tell the libs in here celebrating, but not once mentioning the innocent unborn this will potentially save.

Why doesn’t anyone ever care about the guilty unborn? They deserve a voice too.

Back on the post for you.

[Call_me_Ishmael]

@tnt

@Piper

When did Conservatives have the majority on the SC that they could consider overturning Roe v Wade?

What does that have to do with wether or not settled law should be overturned?

Like Dred Scott?

[Jezcoe]

@Call_me_Ishmael

@tnt

@Piper

When did Conservatives have the majority on the SC that they could consider overturning Roe v Wade?

What does that have to do with wether or not settled law should be overturned?

Like Dred Scott?

That was taken care of with an amendment.

But what makes Taney’s decision so onerous was that rights were based on race….not status.

Because of that decision, black people could never be full citizens.

[Samm]

@W_and_C

@Samm

@W_and_C

@Samm

@W_and_C

@Samm

@TommyLucchese

@Guvnah

Case in point

You guys had a lock on taking back the House and Senate in six months. Democrats were drowning without a single issue to run on but talking about Trump, which inherently benefits your team.

Now they’ve been handed an issue that is overwhelmingly popular with the vast majority of the country and best of all, no Trump involved. All they have to say is, “judges and codifying Roe into law.”

Midterms are race to the base elections. As in, whoever gets more of their base voters out wins. Democrats may turn out in presidential election numbers in November.

Give us a freaking break! There is not one person in this country who is horrified by the prospect of Roe v. Wade being overturned who was going to vote Republican if it isn’t.

I think there may be a few, actually.

F.e. suburban moms who are pro-choice but were fed up with Democrats COVID and woke school policies.

Aside from that, this may energize a somewhat anemic Democratic base and get them to turn out.

By election time, the ruling will be old news and not one politician running for election will be able to do anything about it anyway.

“It’s the economy stupid” is not just a catchy slogan, it’s a truism.

It’ll probably be mostly about the economy, yes - especially if we enter recession.

But this will be a factor as well.

No it won’t, not to the vast majority. The lines were drawn years ago. This won’t change a thing.

I agree, to the “vast majority” it likely will not matter. Like I mentioned above, the demographic that it’s likely to influence are the suburban moms who were starting to swing over to GOP.

What makes you think that abortion is a swing vote issue for suburban housewives? What makes you think they would blame Republicans for a Supreme Court ruling?

[Jezcoe]

@Samm

What makes you think they would blame Republicans for a Supreme Court ruling?

You are kidding… right?

[JayJay]

@tnt

@TheRedComet

Please stop comparing abortion to interracial marriage or hell race at all. It’s beyond offensive. Interracial marriage doesn’t involve anyone dying without due process.

There is a Pacific Ocean sized difference between the two.

There are other examples you could use to prove your point.

I was speaking legally.

Read the opinion.

It hinges upon the idea that any right not explicitly mentioned in the constitution (ie: abortion. Interracial marriage. gay marriage. Access to contraception) should be handled at the state level.

legally, there is no daylight between them.

I’ll play Devil’s Advocate since I’ve read the entire draft.

They address the very rulings you discuss in them.

The “daylight” they offer is the moral question as to whether it is acceptable to kill other life (whether or not we define a fetus as a person, it is a human life that is being terminated. Pro-choicers really need to admit that to themselves). The other rulings don’t involve a decision to terminate a life. This does involve such a decision.

They do mention the various amendments, including the 9th and 14th. They state SCOTUS has always held that to determine whether something is a right according to the 9th Amendment or under the equal protection offered by the 14th, it must be long rooted in our historical traditions or else necessary for “ordered liberty”. This opinion draft would “rule” that the abortion right is rooted in neither.

Greater legal minds than mine can inform us whether this has always been SCOTUS’ practice in determining whether something is an “unenumerated right”.

I’m not arguing one way or another or offering an opinion. I’m simply telling you this draft opinion does address the “daylight” they perceive and does address the 9th/14th Amendment arguments.

[fallenturtle]

@Samm

@fallenturtle

@ohknow35

Tell the libs in here celebrating, but not once mentioning the innocent unborn this will potentially save.

Why doesn’t anyone ever care about the guilty unborn? They deserve a voice too.

Back on the post for you.

Please keep your twisted fantasies about me to yourself.