Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is no more "Constitution aside" at this superb SCOTUS.
That is precisely what I wanted from the 2016 election.
Our newest 3 are likely on SCOTUS into the 2050s.
Did you know that many conservative justices already ruled in the other two cases but now these are supposed to be strict constitutionalists. Just be honest, you just want abortion stopped and of course why would you care since it doesn't effect you. Amusing to hear Barrett who claimed she had respect for precedent now questioning whether adoption was an option.
Yes we now have a right wing court, maybe in the future we will elect a liberal court and ignore this precedent since that no longer matters, viability no longer has meaning. Every election we can switch out the judges to get what we want, this sure doesn't convince anyone the court isn't partisan. Like Mississippi stated, we brought this suit because we now have a conservative court.
I hope these red states have a master plan to address the social problems this creates but I doubt it, religion comes first and foremost no matter the outcome.
Last edited by Goodnight; 12-03-2021 at 05:54 AM..
The pro abortion folks dreaded this case as they know the Constitution did not comment in any way, shape, or form on the issue of abortion.
I do not expect a full Roe overturn, but I do think the decisions on the issue will return to local control. I also think Federally mandated viability tests will end, as they should, since medical breakthroughs will keep changing that, no doubt.
Wednesday was superb, as tons of questions were asked, in terms of questioning why the feds stepped into a local rights issue in the first place, and whether or not it should stay in the decision-making process.
I have already stated my position several times, which is not as cut and dry as you assume. It’s not my fault if you didn’t read it.
I was trying to be kind as I don’t know what happened to you and why you made the decisions you did.
Abortion is available for any woman in this country. You have exactly what you want. But you cannot get everyone to think it’s the good, right or moral thing. And maybe that’s the problem.
The only reason anyone starts to care about someone opposing it is when that caring starts to influence access.
RBG's "legal mind" was the consistency of pea soup the last 10 years she was on the Court. Even before then, there is nothing brilliant or even remarkable about her jurisprudence. She always followed her politics, not the law.
Bingo! Like nearly all lefties, RBG ruled according to her "feelings," not according to the actual US Constitution, thereby violating her sworn oath. She was a walking, talking miscarriage of justice.
Bingo! Like nearly all lefties, RBG ruled according to her "feelings," not according to the actual US Constitution, thereby violating her sworn oath. She was a walking, talking miscarriage of justice.
"You must spread around some reputation before giving more to InformedConsent"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
