So how many times did the abortion issue come up at the table when they were writing the constitution?
Here’s another hint: there are ways to amend the constitution. The Supreme Court is not the legislative branch. When roe v Wade was decided, the Supreme Court overstepped their bounds in their decision. That’s all this ruling says. It gets sent back to the states to decide what to do, as it should be.
Dont like it? Start contacting your state reps and working towards amending the US constitution. There are correct ways to go about this.
Far simpler task is to vote in legislators who think your way. A constitutional amendment is incredibly hard and unnecessary.
now the right wing will go after same-sex marriage. All done by the minority party, which has won one popular vote since 1988. What a country.
Bush 88, Bush 2 00, 04
If trump wins again scotus will ban contraception, gay rights by 2026. It will be like Sunday school everyday in America lmao.
Did SCOTUS ban abortion? I must have missed that part. Can you point me to where you read that?
You can be in favor of certain principles while still accepting that cases were decided on garbage law. SCOTUS doesn’t make laws, it can only say whether or not an existing one is unconstitutional. I think you probably know that, but everyone is trying to be dramatic today.
That’s not true at least not in my state. All abortions are illegal no exceptions. If it’s an ectopic pregnancy you’re pretty much just dead. I’m hoping this gets fixed but that’s the status of the law as of 10AM this morning.
What state is that?
I’m guessing Texas but I don’t want to speak for him. I see all these pro lifers trying to conflate taking an abortion pill for a miscarriage/ectopic pregnancy as ‘miscarriage management’ and it’s not the same thing. Just call a spade a spade. Drs use abortion pills for miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies. The blinders these people put on is wild. But trans people bad I get it.
They want to run on this. And the 1/6 "insurrection".
Not on the things that really matter.
Republican politicians have run on pro-life as an important, in some cases primary, platform for decades. Many Republicans are single-issue voters on abortion.
President Trump was claiming election fraud weeks before the 11/2020 election and made it his primary talking point after he lost the election ("stop the steal").
I don't think you can say Dems are the ones running on things that don't matter.
The Democrats are going to get slaughtered in the November elections. So this is just the tip of the iceberg. I am so happy that this issue has been settled and that states can protect unborn lives in their own jurisdictions. A national law banning abortion is a real possibility. Sorry Baghdad Agip. The 50s were the happiest time in US history and this is the first step in restoring the kind of democracy we had then.
The 50s were not such a happy time for blacks living in the South (or many northern cities for that matter). Jews were openly discriminated against as well. Women had their rights severely restricted as well.
We have Trump to thank for this. Ain’t a mean tweet in the world that can overshadow what is now the greatest presidential legacy in history.
Trump just delivered the biggest victory for conservatives in a generation
Ironic considering Trump is not a conservative in the sense of the word as it existed prior to 2016. For instance, he is not for limited government. In fact, he has no principle except "worship me".
Here’s another hint: there are ways to amend the constitution. The Supreme Court is not the legislative branch. When roe v Wade was decided, the Supreme Court overstepped their bounds in their decision. That’s all this ruling says. It gets sent back to the states to decide what to do, as it should be.
Dont like it? Start contacting your state reps and working towards amending the US constitution. There are correct ways to go about this.
Far simpler task is to vote in legislators who think your way. A constitutional amendment is incredibly hard and unnecessary.
Very true. Which is why I mentioned contacting your existing state reps. If their views don’t line up with yours, put them on notice. Big picture take away is people should stop vilifying SCOTUS when dems have been in power many, many times since Roe v Wade yet have never pushed to vote on making abortion law. They were too worried about getting voted out or too comfortable with the idea that roe was a solid ruling (even RBG knew it wasn’t).
STOP LYING. Even the most republican states are going to allow abortions in cases where the mother's health is at risk. They will also allow abortions in the case of rape or incest.
Wouldn't be so sure. A woman's health is always 'at risk' when pregnant. That's why civilized people let women decide if pregnancy is a risk they want to take on.
And we as a civilized society created the means to prevent (or at least greatly reduce) the chances of a woman getting pregnant in the first place.
An argument can be made that a civilized society does not kill its most vulnerable. (I am okay with early term abortion on demand, but it also seems slightly uncivilized at the same time.)
now the right wing will go after same-sex marriage.
All done by the minority party, which has won one popular vote since 1988.
What a country.
A popular vote for president, but a party that has won majorities in many state legislatures and governerships. A party that has won the House a few times since 1988 as well.
I do not see the same fervor to end gay marriage that existed for abortion. Other than Thomas I don't think anyone on the court wants to revisit that.
On the plus side, since SCOTUS ruled earlier this week that religious schools can benefit from state taxpayer funding and affirmed state's rights with today's decision, blue states are now free to tax the living f**k out of religious organizations via legislation. For funsies, earmark those dollars to fund Planned Parenthood within their respective state borders!
What part of the Maine decision says states can tax religious organizations?
Clarence Thomas, concurring: "in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell."
Jeez, is this where this is heading?
Just so we're clear, the right to contraception, gay marriage and even the right to be in a gay relationship without being prosecuted, are now up for debate?
There will actually be social unrest and civil disobedience if they try and do this.
It should be noted that no other justice signed the concurrence.
no they can't. churches, synagogues, mosques, etc are tax-exempt.
From FEDERAL taxation. The states are free to impose what they wish on churches within their borders. It will be appealed to SCOTUS but, will the conservatives contradict themselves by declaring that state's do not have a right to self-govern as they see fit? Looking forward to property taxes being levied on churches, synagogues, mosques, and megachurches.
They could have done this all along. So you would have the government use its power against a position you do not like? Sounds like the authoritarianism is not limited to Trump et al.
Barrett said. "Roe is a precedent of the Supreme Court entitled to respect under the doctrine of stare decisis."
Kavanaugh, in 2018, said Roe "is settled as a precedent of the Supreme Court, entitled the respect under principles of stare decisis.
Gorsuch, in 2017, "I would tell you that Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court,"
And we wonder why Americans have lost faith in the Supreme Court...
None of those quotes are "I will never overturn". They note a respect that should be afforded precedent. None of them lied. They all basically followed the same pattern in answering questions as every Dem and Rep nominated candidate before them when asked such a question.
The Democrats has control of both house and the WH and could have passed a federal law to codify abortion rights yet did not. They had enough of a majority to pass the ACA; they (to my recollection) never even put a bill forth to codify abortion in any way.
Roe was a precedent. Precedents can be overturned. There's no controversy here, sorry your media sources misled you.
It’s not about my media sources. Yes, precedent can be overturned, but these three justices literally said that it was settled law during their hearings. And then changed it in their very first opportunity. What I’m stating is that the American public has lost faith in the court because justices will say anything to get appointed.
I found a video of Gorsuch. Never is "settled law" said by him. If you have a clip showing it, please share it.
I had thought until today that reversing roe would be good for national dems...but I was wrong.
the Rs will now make banning abortion a national goal in the congress, so this crisis will be with us forever. A national ban could happen as soon as 2025 if the Rs get rid of the filibuster.