SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[cubby]

What bugs me the most is that Alito anticipates the objection that the ruling his authoring can and will be used to undermine a host of rights enumerated under the 14th and desperately tries to head this of by saying dont worry about it ite just abortion. He's a shitty used car salesman telling you not to look under the hood.

Agreed. There are so many problems with the leaked memo, and unfortunately, it looks like it's going to be law.

And in case it isn't clear, I'm on the side of Roe v Wade, and all the things it encompasses and stands for. I think the memo is an abomination of justice and goes against all the rights the United States stands for.

[Endus]

Agreed. There are so many problems with the leaked memo, and unfortunately, it looks like it's going to be law.

And in case it isn't clear, I'm on the side of Roe v Wade, and all the things it encompasses and stands for. I think the memo is an abomination of justice and goes against all the rights the United States stands for.

The real problem is that the USA is still operating with an 18th Century document as the basis of their entire legal framework. It's beyond silly. Canada updated ours in '82 for a reason, and our original founding documents were put together nearly a century after yours.

[Jastall]

Unfortunately, that's not how it's played out in our courts. The 9th essentially lets us address issues that aren't specifically laid out in the Constitution, to cover items and issues that the Founders didn't specifically lay out. However, what it doesn't say is that those unenumerated rights will or won't be covered by the federal government.

It's entirely vague and literally left open to interpretation. Which the lower courts and SCOTUS have done, thoroughly and inconsistently, over the years.

- - - Updated - - -



Unfortunately, the court and it's history of rulings disagrees with you and Endus.

SCOTUS does have a long history of favoring the federal government over state government rights. That history is now shifting, much to the detriment of us all.

Oh, I'm not saying they're being consistent, rather the contrary in fact. It's naked political opportunism.

[cubby]

The real problem is that the USA is still operating with an 18th Century document as the basis of their entire legal framework. It's beyond silly. Canada updated ours in '82 for a reason, and our original founding documents were put together nearly a century after yours.

I wish we could rewrite the entire thing. There are so many fundamental problems with it. Of course it will never happen. Not in any civilized fashion, at least.

[Masark]

The real problem is that the USA is still operating with an 18th Century document as the basis of their entire legal framework. It's beyond silly. Canada updated ours in '82 for a reason, and our original founding documents were put together nearly a century after yours.

Additional problems stem from their basis of constitutional interpretation ("originalism", which has been pretty much entirely rejected up here, while it is taken seriously at pretty much every level down there) and the profound difficulty in performing even fairly trivial amendments.

[Draco-Onis]

The real problem is that the USA is still operating with an 18th Century document as the basis of their entire legal framework. It's beyond silly. Canada updated ours in '82 for a reason, and our original founding documents were put together nearly a century after yours.

The reason for that is obvious a lot of Americans want to go back to a magical version of the white christian puritan days and the constitution is as sacred to them as the bible.

[PACOX]

It's not ideal, but at least some will have a choice, re: moving to a state that better fits their values.

And yes, some will not be able to. I'm not sure if a one size fits all solution exists for such a polarizing issue.

No one is going to get to vote on it, though.

Anti-abortion laws aren't placed on ballots because they wouldn't pass. Anti-abortion laws will be handled the same way Republicans have been operating the last two years (most of the time but the practice has resurfaced), through the Govenor or state legislature without allowing residents to have a say. The kicker is that Republicans are good at passing their shit in ways that a damning even if they know it will be overtuned in court but creating a legal shitshow.

[tehdang]

It's not ideal, but at least some will have a choice, re: moving to a state that better fits their values.

And yes, some will not be able to. I'm not sure if a one size fits all solution exists for such a polarizing issue.

I don't think a national solution makes any sense, because it is a question of values. Full ban, 6 weeks, 15 weeks, 20 weeks, second trimester, third trimester, all the way up to crowning/delivery, exceptions, funding, medical certifications, oversight.

[Endus]

I don't think a national solution makes any sense, because it is a question of values. Full ban, 6 weeks, 15 weeks, 20 weeks, second trimester, third trimester, all the way up to crowning/delivery, exceptions, funding, medical certifications, oversight.

The only "values" in question, fundamentally, are whether or not you see women as people, or as breeding livestock who don't deserve basic respect and human rights.

Everything else is an irrelevant distraction from that central point. Any limitation on abortion rights is an attack on women's human rights, and all the nonsense about fetal development is a smokescreen to cover for that dismissal of women's personhood.

[Azadina]

I don't think a national solution makes any sense, because it is a question of values. Full ban, 6 weeks, 15 weeks, 20 weeks, second trimester, third trimester, all the way up to crowning/delivery, exceptions, funding, medical certifications, oversight.

Fancy way of saying that any attempt at compromise with the anti abortion crowd is complete waste of time.

[Edge-]

I don't think a national solution makes any sense, because it is a question of values. Full ban, 6 weeks, 15 weeks, 20 weeks, second trimester, third trimester, all the way up to crowning/delivery, exceptions, funding, medical certifications, oversight.

Ok, but I'm not sure a state solution makes any sense either, because states are largely still pretty big and diverse places with lots of values so maybe it's better left up to counties or cities. Maybe we can futher narrow it down to zip codes, since now we're getting really targeted in ensuring that people can live their values on the issue of abortion. Heck, let's go all the way to individuals.

This way, since it's a questions of values and we are a society of individuals, I think we should respect everyone's individual values on the topic of abortion. This is maximum freedom to express ones values on the topic, which seems supremely American to me.

[Endus]

Fancy way of saying that any attempt at compromise with the anti abortion crowd is complete waste of time.

"Okay, so how much can we attack women's basic rights and freedoms? We gotta compromise on some level of subjugation, right? Can't let the wimmenz just be people like us men, can we? That's ridiculous."

Absolutely steaming nonsense. It's not a negotiation. Accepting the concept of compromise on this issue requires admitting that women are inferior and deserve fewer rights.

- - - Updated - - -

Ok, but I'm not sure a state solution makes any sense either, because states are largely still pretty big and diverse places with lots of values so maybe it's better left up to counties or cities. Maybe we can futher narrow it down to zip codes, since now we're getting really targeted in ensuring that people can live their values on the issue of abortion. Heck, let's go all the way to individuals.

This way, since it's a questions of values and we are a society of individuals, I think we should respect everyone's individual values on the topic of abortion. This is maximum freedom to express ones values on the topic, which seems supremely American to me.

Like, maybe it should be a decision between any given pregnant woman and her doctor, who's best suited to understand what's medically relevant to her case?

That's how it is in Canada. Literally no other restrictions. Abortion has no special limitations under the law; it's subject to the same oversight as getting a broken arm set or getting an antibiotic prescription, for medical ethics, and that's it.

Been that way for over 30 years, and it's led to precisely zero issues.

[Glorious Leader]

Ok, but I'm not sure a state solution makes any sense either, because states are largely still pretty big and diverse places with lots of values so maybe it's better left up to counties or cities. Maybe we can futher narrow it down to zip codes, since now we're getting really targeted in ensuring that people can live their values on the issue of abortion. Heck, let's go all the way to individuals.

This way, since it's a questions of values and we are a society of individuals, I think we should respect everyone's individual values on the topic of abortion. This is maximum freedom to express ones values on the topic, which seems supremely American to me.

I like that you had to explain personal liberty to a conservative.

[Kaleredar]

I like that you had to explain personal liberty to a conservative.

Generally, they want the personal liberty to tell people what to do.

"I should have the liberty to tell someone they can't get an abortion."

"I should have the liberty to not have to see or hear about gay people"

"I should have the liberty to force others to stop protesting against things I like"

[beanman12345]

Eh, I don't know where the posters whining about the leak as the most important issue to discuss here stand on Hale, so I can't comment on that. Unless you mean in more general sense than just this thread, in which case that could very well be motivation for some. After all even some (though, let's face it, most certainly not all) modern Republicans would consider Hale's views to be a bit too much and would feel the need to deflect from them.

Yes that's my point, Republicans like Mitch is only crying about this cause of Hale. Its all deflection, it's always deflection and/or projection.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I don't think a national solution makes any sense, because it is a question of values. Full ban, 6 weeks, 15 weeks, 20 weeks, second trimester, third trimester, all the way up to crowning/delivery, exceptions, funding, medical certifications, oversight.

If it's values based...decide for yourself when you no longer think its acceptable for you to have an abortion.

[Fugus]

Generally, they want the personal liberty to tell people what to do.

"I should have the liberty to tell someone they can't get an abortion."

"I should have the liberty to not have to see or hear about gay people"

"I should have the liberty to force others to stop protesting against things I like"

I have almost word for word had someone literally tell me that second one without a hint of irony when they said it.

[Polyxo]

Republicans are apparently already planning on trying to institute a total ban on abortion at the federal level, with Lankford and Ernst spearheading the effort.

[tehdang]

Fancy way of saying that any attempt at compromise with the anti abortion crowd is complete waste of time.

Same right back at you. If none of those questions on proposed legislation matter to you, and you don't even regard it as a question of values, then maybe you're the impediment to compromise.

Ok, but I'm not sure a state solution makes any sense either, because states are largely still pretty big and diverse places with lots of values so maybe it's better left up to counties or cities. Maybe we can futher narrow it down to zip codes, since now we're getting really targeted in ensuring that people can live their values on the issue of abortion. Heck, let's go all the way to individuals.

This way, since it's a questions of values and we are a society of individuals, I think we should respect everyone's individual values on the topic of abortion. This is maximum freedom to express ones values on the topic, which seems supremely American to me.

I'll stick with states, but even mocking discussion of the principle of subsidiarity is progress.

If it's values based...decide for yourself when you no longer think its acceptable for you to have an abortion.

You weren't personally a slave, so how dare you have an opinion on slavery! Decide for yourself if you wish to own slaves. Or murder. Or if stealing is wrong.

(This is pretty much pro-choice and pro-life boilerplate)

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

You weren't personally a slave, so how dare you have an opinion on slavery! Decide for yourself if you wish to own slaves. Or murder. Or if stealing is wrong.

Abortion, unlike slavery, murder, or stealing, doesn't affect anyone else.