Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights per draft opinion (Update: Dobbs opinion official) (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    Not long ago Kari Lake proclaimed Arizona's abortion law was a great law and wanted it the law of the state.

    Now that she has gotten her way, she is lobbying for it to be repealed.

    As I have been saying since 2022, the overwhelming vast majority of women aren't going to vote for the man who proudly boasts that he got rid of Roe V. Wade. Nor are those women going to vote for a forced birther politician.

    Turns out, republican belief in "pro life" was all just lies to get votes. Who is surprised? I sure am not.

    How many forced birthers will do the same about face?

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/ka ... r-BB1ltx3I.

    Arizona Republican Senate candidate Kari Lake is actively lobbying state lawmakers to overturn a 160-year-old law she once supported that bans abortion in almost all cases, a source with knowledge of her efforts told CNN.
     
    Perhaps but I’m saying Stern’s tweet misrepresents the section of the draft opinion. It does not call those rights “phony”. The same list includes the right against involuntary surgery.
    So involuntary birth is different in his eyes? I propose every man is available for forced blood donation and/or bone marrow donation at any time the government deems it necessary. Men will still get off easy. See how men like having their bodies regulated by the government.
     
    And the right wing is asking the FBI to seize all the computers immediately, like now, and do an interrogation of all the Justices and their clerks. Good lord, I don’t want to hear that women are over-reacting to this. Egged on by hot takes like this gem.

     
    Court packing wouldn't solve anything and only spur an endless downward cycle of additional Justices being added whenever power changed hands.

    It'll never happen, but I think age limits should be in place. I dislike the idea of old, set in their ways 70+ year olds sitting around and making decisions to affect the rest of the country for decades. What do they care if they'll tear shirt part? They won't be around much longer to see what happens in the years to come
     
    I don't get this? What good is Roe vs. Wade if individual states can remove a women's right? Didn't the SCOTUS say abortion was a constitutional right?
     
    So involuntary birth is different in his eyes? I propose every man is available for forced blood donation and/or bone marrow donation at any time the government deems it necessary. Men will still get off easy. See how men like having their bodies regulated by the government.

    Alito is the worst.
     
    Just posting these here:





    I also read that in the leaked opinion, Alito also specifically singles out several other precedents that he says should not be, chief among them single sex marriage.


    There's no end to the wrath of right wing extremism all around this country. This court isn't stopping at abortion. By the time they finish, all kind of individual rights will have been eroded. The slide to authoritarianism is in full swing. And yet, the citizens of this country are by all prognostication, ready to give them back power. It's Orwellian and yet completely predictable.
     
    Last edited:
    There now end to the wrath of right wing extremism all around this country. This court isn't stopping at abortion. By the time they finish, all kind of individual rights will have been eroded.
    The side to authoritarianism is in full swing. And yet, the citizens of this country are by all prognostication are ready to give them back power. It's Orwellian and yet completely predictable.
    Scary.
     
    It’s shocking really, has it ever happened before?
    First I've heard of it. I'm assuming the Supreme Court has a fairly extended circulation period such that it is not uncommon for the authoring Justice to release a draft several weeks (if not months) in advance of any targeted opinion release date. I get that it's a bombshell in terms of a change in jurisprudence but leaking it is staggering breach of protocol.
     
    First I've heard of it. I'm assuming the Supreme Court has a fairly extended circulation period such that it is not uncommon for the authoring Justice to release a draft several weeks (if not months) in advance of any targeted opinion release date. I get that it's a bombshell in terms of a change in jurisprudence but leaking it is staggering breach of protocol.
    Yeah. Someone is definitely losing a job. But I don't know of any law prohibiting such thing. Is there?
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom