Roe v. Wade is going down

[One Brow]

Am I being alarmist? Are we sure?

Justice Thomas: SCOTUS ‘should reconsider’ contraception, same-sex marriage rulings

Democrats warned that the court would seek to undo other constitutional rights if it overturned Roe v. Wade, as it did on Friday.

www.politico.com

I mean they’re saying it out loud, right?

The other 5 justices did not concur with Thomas's opinion here. He's alone in those thoughts on SCOTUS. IIRC, in the draft, the presence of the fetus made Roe a particular case not like the others.

However, I am amused he does not include Loving vs. Virginia in his list, even though it's based on the same legal principles. I wonder why?

 

[Gameface]

Am I being alarmist? Are we sure?

Justice Thomas: SCOTUS ‘should reconsider’ contraception, same-sex marriage rulings

Democrats warned that the court would seek to undo other constitutional rights if it overturned Roe v. Wade, as it did on Friday.

www.politico.com

I mean they’re saying it out loud, right?

I wasn't talking about any of those things. I was talking about investigations into miscarriage looking to prove illegal abortions. I mean ****, maybe that's going to be a thing and if it is then it's horrendous. I think there are going to be some situations like ectopic pregnancies that are forced to go on that are going to kill women and not result in a living baby and it's going to start looking really bad for the anti-abortion crowd. If they want to witch hunt women who miscarry I think they'll look worse still.

 

[One Brow]

I wasn't talking about any of those things. I was talking about investigations into miscarriage looking to prove illegal abortions. I mean ****, maybe that's going to be a thing and if it is then it's horrendous.

We offered a couple of cases where it's happened.

 

[Gameface]

We offered a couple of cases where it's happened.

Yeah with specific circumstances and in a world where Roe V Wade existed. Thriller's post made it sound like every miscarriage would trigger an investigation and we'd be building new prison camps for all the women falsely convicted of aborting their babies.

 

[Deleted member 365]

The other 5 justices did not concur with Thomas's opinion here. He's alone in those thoughts on SCOTUS. IIRC, in the draft, the presence of the fetus made Roe a particular case not like the others.

However, I am amused he does not include Loving vs. Virginia in his list, even though it's based on the same legal principles. I wonder why?

Or they're being coy with it. Keep in mind, both Kavanaugh and Barett said that Roe was settled law and they'd respect precedent. I think clearly Thomas and Alito drive this court and if they truly desire to roll back on these rights, they'll intimate their way to a majority.

Haha, yes, I think we all know why he won't touch Loving v Virginia. Funny how that's settled law yet Miranda wasn't despite being one year older... Hmmm...

 

[One Brow]

Yeah with specific circumstances and in a world where Roe V Wade existed. Thriller's post made it sound like every miscarriage would trigger an investigation and we'd be building new prison camps for all the women falsely convicted of aborting their babies.

Don't be silly. Wealthy people won't be suspected.

I agree The Thriller is putting forth the worst possible outcome. It's probably a little far-fetched. It's not impossible, as seen by prosecutions for miscarriage happening regularly in Nicaragua.

 

[One Brow]

Or they're being coy with it. Keep in mind, both Kavanaugh and Barett said that Roe was settled law and they'd respect precedent.

I'm sure the judges would still say they respected precedent and stare decisis. Outside of Manchin, Collins, and Murkowski, who really believed that they would not overturn Roe?

I think clearly Thomas and Alito drive this court and if they truly desire to roll back on these rights, they'll intimate their way to a majority.

Maybe. Robert's refused to vote to end DACA, and he's been shifting a little to the left over the course of his term.

Haha, yes, I think we all know why he won't touch Loving v Virginia. Funny how that's settled law yet Miranda wasn't despite being one year older... Hmmm...

It will be hard to overturn cases like Griswold while not overturning cases like Bakke.

 

[Zombie]

Or they're being coy with it. Keep in mind, both Kavanaugh and Barett said that Roe was settled law and they'd respect precedent. I think clearly Thomas and Alito drive this court and if they truly desire to roll back on these rights, they'll intimate their way to a majority.

I don't think there's any reason to take the legal arguments of these justices at all seriously.

The court is a nakedly partisan institution, the last week of rulings should be enough evidence for anyone to see that they will use whatever arguments they see fit to fulfill their political goals.

 

[Deleted member 365]

I don't think there's any reason to take the legal arguments of these justices at all seriously.

The court is a nakedly partisan institution, the last week of rulings should be enough evidence for anyone to see that they will use whatever arguments they see fit to fulfill their political goals.

Right. Which is why if you can imagine it getting worse, then you’re probably right. There is no bottom with these guys. They’ll do anything to keep their base at the Federalist Society happy. They’re an active arm of the Republican Party. The Republican Party is an authoritarian party.

 

[Deleted member 365]

I'm sure the judges would still say they respected precedent and stare decisis. Outside of Manchin, Collins, and Murkowski, who really believed that they would not overturn Roe?


Maybe. Robert's refused to vote to end DACA, and he's been shifting a little to the left over the course of his term.


It will be hard to overturn cases like Griswold while not overturning cases like Bakke.

Perhaps?

But roberts vote is no longer needed for the majority. So even if he sides with liberals on a variety of these issues, Republican activists have his vote to spare, winning 5-4 instead of 6-3.

 

[One Brow]

But roberts vote is no longer needed for the majority. So even if he sides with liberals on a variety of these issues, Republican activists have his vote to spare, winning 5-4 instead of 6-3.

Perhaps. Kavanaugh seems to vote with Roberts more than most of the other justices. Gorsuch and Barrett each have their own priorities.

I like that you and people like you are putting up warning signs. It's important to remind people what could happen.

 

[One Brow]

The court is a nakedly partisan institution, the last week of rulings should be enough evidence for anyone to see that they will use whatever arguments they see fit to fulfill their political goals.

Do you have an example of different rulings that used incompatible logic? I agree they are partisan, but that doesn't mean they don't take the law and interpretation seriously.