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

[LovesMusic7360]

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Now that she has gotten her way, she is lobbying for it to be repealed.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

 

[not2rich]

It would just end up back at the supreme court where, short of a Pelican Brief style reduction of the court, they would just vote in favor of keeping abortion illegal.

If they really are just partisan hacks...maybe. But if they are going to be at all consistent with their judicial philosophy, it's really, really - and I mean really - hard to justify a Federal abortion ban based on the Commerce Clause.

 

[Optimus Prime]

On Mississippi
===========

The United States has the highest maternal death rate in the developed world; Mississippi has one of the higher maternal death rates within the United States.

The odds are worse for Black women, whose risk of death related to pregnancy and childbirth are nearly triple those for White women in the state.

Mississippi also has the country’s highest infant mortality and child poverty rates.


When asked this weekend how this track record squares with his avowed pro-life bona fides, Gov. Tate Reeves (R) acknowledged the state’s “problems” and said he was committed to devoting more “resources” to make sure that expectant and new mothers get the “help that they need from a health-care standpoint.”


That would be welcome news if it were true. But it isn’t.


Mississippi’s legislature recently considered whether to extend Medicaid postpartum coverage from 60 days to a full year after birth, as federal law newly allows states to do.

If you care about the lives of new moms (and, by extension, their kids), this is a no-brainer. Roughly 6 in 10 births in the state are covered by Medicaid; 86 percent of the state’s maternal deaths occur postpartum.

Pregnancy and delivery raise the risk of many health complications, including infections, blood clots, high blood pressure, heart conditions and postpartum depression. Giving low-income moms access to health care a full year after birth would save lives.


But Mississippi’s Republican leadership rejected the proposal. Not because the state lacks the funds (which would be partly covered by the federal government); one thing state pols did manage to get through this session was the state’s largest-ever tax cut.


So what did Reeves mean when he said that the state had directed more “resources” to helping moms get care? He was referring to a new tax credit for private donations to “crisis pregnancy centers,” which are nonprofits largely devoted to persuading women not to get abortions.

These centers, which are usually religiously affiliated, also have a long track record of spreading false or misleading medical information about abortions and contraception.

Meanwhile, Mississippi politicians appear to be contemplating measures to ban or reduce access to contraception, given Reeves’s evasive responses to questions over the weekend.

So are other red states, including Louisiana, Missouri and Idaho, based on politicians’ comments, legislative language under consideration or trigger laws already on the books.

In some cases the laws may ban emergency contraception and intrauterine devices…….

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/10/republican-politicians-are-less-antiabortion-than-pro-forcing-birth/

 

[superchuck500]

So this is forking crazy. Susan Collins’s response to a pro-choice sidewalk chalk message was to call police.

 

[superchuck500]

It would just end up back at the supreme court where, short of a Pelican Brief style reduction of the court, they would just vote in favor of keeping abortion illegal.

I don't know - it would have to reconcile with a trend of cases recognizing the limits of federal lawmaking authority . . . a line long-supported by the conservative wing.

 

[Colin Norris]

Not surprising. It's actually somewhat more surprising a draft was leaked although I'm sure it was one of the law clerks. Just goes to show that the federal courts are little more than a supra-legislature.

Its not set in stone yet and I wonder if it was deliberately done to test the water.

 

[RobF]

I don't know - it would have to reconcile with a trend of cases recognizing the limits of federal lawmaking authority . . . a line long-supported by the conservative wing.

From a completely unqualified point of view, couldn't a national law be seen to be within those limits, if it could be framed as necessary to protect individual Constitutional rights?

And that said, I've only skimmed the leaked opinion now, but I can see a number of reasons why, from the point of view laid out there (note: I want to be explicitly clear, this is very much not my view), a national law giving a right to an abortion could be considered to be overreach; e.g. it argues that "procuring an abortion is not a fundamental constitutional right because such a right has no basis in the Constitution's text or in our Nation's history," and that "The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion." And, logically, if the Constitution doesn't prohibit a State prohibiting abortion, it follows that federal law following the Constitution can't prohibit a State from doing so. So that would seem to suggest this Supreme Court, taking that view, would be likely to reject a national law giving a right to an abortion.

I'm not sure, though, and again from the point of view laid out in that opinion, that reasoning is as strong as would be applied to the case of a national law that, let's say, 'strongly regulates' abortion. Again, I've only skimmed it, but spends a lot of time arguing that not only is there not a right to an abortion in "the Nation's history and traditions," but it's the opposite ("On the contrary, an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of the common law until 1973.").

It does make the case that "Ordered liberty sets limits and defines the boundary between competing interests," in the context of the "particular balance between the interests of a woman who wants an abortion and the interests of what they [Roe and Casey] termed "potential life."", and in that context, states that, "In some States, voters may believe that the abortion right should be even more extensive than the right that Roe and Casey recognized," (while also noting that "Voters in other States may wish to impose tight restrictions based on their belief that abortion destroys an "unborn human being""), which would seem to imply that liberty would require some recognition at least of the interests of a woman, which would in turn suggest that a federal law that outright prohibited abortion would be on tenuous grounds.

But I'm not sure that in itself would preclude a law like, for example, the Gestational Age Act from Mississippi that the opinion is about being passed at a national level. I would think that the hurdle would be that, where the opinion has held that the Mississippi act has a rational basis due to legitimate interests including 'the State's interest in "protecting the life of the unborn"', it would have to be ruled that particular interest is a constitutional right held by the unborn.

So I guess my question ultimately is, if a national law were to be passed on those grounds, that the unborn are protected under the Constitution, would it be impossible for this Supreme Court to declare that they do, and thus uphold a national law akin to Mississippi's Act?

 

[SFIDC3]

If they really are just partisan hacks...maybe. But if they are going to be at all consistent with their judicial philosophy, it's really, really - and I mean really - hard to justify a Federal abortion ban based on the Commerce Clause.

I think the fact that a few of them stated that they weren't partisan hacks in a news conference a while back set the stage for proving now that they actually are.....

This whole thing smacks again of a solution where no problem exists....

 

[J-DONK]

I certainly can blame the voters for the flaws of elected officials.

The time to throw tantrums is during the primaries, not after your candidate (who didn't even belong to the party to begin with) loses the nomination, and your refusal to vote on election day helps someone like Trump reach the presidency.

Oust myself as someone who can't rationalize.... that's funny right there.

Learn to attack the argument, not the person making the argument, because when you do the latter, it doesn't make you sound like you think it makes you sound.

You are getting nowhere attacking a voting bloc. The flip side of that argument is the African-American voting block is holding back progress by being more conservative then the rest of the party. That doesn't answer why they vote that way. It also doesn't answer why progressives like Bernie aren't able to make inroads with this voting bloc. It also doesn't even try to answer bigger questions like is that a good thing?

You made a lazy, and divisive argument that answers nothing. It only externalizes the blame of failure on what you consider an "out group" of the party. It's a very conservative way of thinking.

Also, if you don't want to be criticized, maybe stop throwing stones.

 

[SystemShock]

You are getting nowhere attacking a voting bloc.

Who is attacking a voting bloc?

The flip side of that argument is the African-American voting block is holding back progress by being more conservative then the rest of the party.

N0, it is not.

It also doesn't answer why progressives like Bernie aren't able to make inroads with this voting bloc. It also doesn't even try to answer bigger questions like is that a good thing?

Who asked a question? No one asked a question, and nothing I posted during this exchange was meant to answer any question.

You made a lazy, and divisive argument that answers nothing.

Or like what we like to call it 'round these parts, the truth.

It only externalizes the blame of failure on what you consider an "out group" of the party.

They were certainly part of the reason why Trump was elected.

It's a very conservative way of thinking.

Or like we like to call it 'round these parts, t

Also, if you don't want to be criticized, maybe stop throwing stones.

I don't care about being criticized. What I told you, it was a piece of advice: attack the argument, not the person making the argument.

 

[DaveXA]

That's the Catch 22 for Dems in 2024. I doubt anyone that can win the party nomination could beat Trump or DeSantis. Maybe someone like Arizona Senator Mark Kelly.

I'm not a Democrat, but I'd vote for Kelly over Trump in a heartbeat. But then, I'd vote for an orangutan over Trump.

 

[MT15]

This is the true story of a 3rd trimester abortion. You all need to read this. This woman would have died had she not been able to get her abortion, had she been made to take her abnormal pregnancy to term. There wasn’t any indication that something was wrong until 28 weeks, and even then, they didn’t know how bad it was until they did the abortion. But this is what the Rs, the evangelicals, and the Catholics are doing, they are injecting themselves into her medical care. They are sentencing someone like her to death. The Boston clinic where she started says they refer someone like her to the clinic where she ended up 2x every month, so you cannot say this situation is extremely rare. I feel sick to my stomach knowing that people are so contemptuous of women’s lives that they want to punish women like her. They want to deny her the very best care that modern medicine can provide, knowing that it may well kill these women. These women who have families, who have other children. I cannot believe we have such cruelty in supposedly Christian people.

Rivers of Babylon: The Story of a Third-Trimester Abortion - The Rumpus

She said something to me, then, that has been a great comfort. “You had a choice,” she said, “but you did not have free will.” A choice that was no choice at all.

therumpus.net

 

[DaveXA]

Because she's as genuine as a Times Square Rolex and has all the personal magnetism of aluminum.

Tell us how you really feel.

 

[MT15]

Also this - routine medical care for women who have miscarried is being affected in TX. How monstrous can this get? Evidently nothing will stop these people from controlling and punishing women.

 

[J-DONK]

Who is attacking a voting bloc?

N0, it is not.

Who asked a question? No one asked a question, and nothing I posted during this exchange was meant to answer any question.

Or like what we like to call it 'round these parts, the truth.

They were certainly part of the reason why Trump was elected.

Or like we like to call it 'round these parts, t

I don't care about being criticized. What I told you, it was a piece of advice: attack the argument, not the person making the argument.

This is simple either the fault is with the candidate, or the voters. There is no reason to try and obfuscate this. It's a simple discussion.

Here is the only statement you need to reply to from any further discussion: What would you do with Bernie Bro's going forward? How do you solve this "problem"? if you can't give an answer, we are done.

I wanted you to realize that logic of blaming voting blocks like Bernie Bro's is exclusionary. It leads to no critical thought about the candidates mistakes, nor how to correct them in the future.

It's funny, but this is essentially your argument. It's really funny when you think about the fact that progressives tend to be younger voters.

 

[Maxp]

That was really hard to read MT15. My wife had a partial molar pregnancy in-between the births of our 2nd and 3rd children. The fetus was mostly placental tissue with organs including a heart. We found out in the first trimester. Her OBGYN kept saying "if only there was something I could do." Most partial molar pregnancies self terminate by the second trimester but ours didn't. None of the hospitals is Alabama would terminate the pregnancy because the placental mass had a heart beat. The "fetus" had 0% chance of a live birth, but left to mother nature my wife had a very high chance of dying.
We were referred to an abortion clinics in Nola, Atlanta, and somewhere else I don't remember now. Luckily, we had personal connections to a very highly regarded MFM specialist, who used his personal standing at the hospital to induce my wife more or less against policy. When my wife started to deliver the partial mole, she started hemorrhaging and the hospital staff rushed her immediately to the OR. They didn't tranfuse her, but the doctor later said she was at the point where he could have.
It was a very painful time for us and especially my wife. Very hopeless, in that completely rational medical care is simply unavailable to women in the South at the expense of their lives. My wife, the mother of 4 kids would have died had she gone to an abortion clinic. Above is the reality of these terrible abortion laws. It makes me sick thinking about it. Sick knowing the unnecessary suffering my wife and many other women have endured and sick from anger.

 

[Optimus Prime]

I do wonder when the horror stories start happening and

When women start dying that shouldn’t due to pregnancies like in mt15’s post,

When women Start dying due to desperate measures to get an abortion, especially when it’s women who aren’t supposed to do that (read: well off suburban white women who are terrified what their parents/husband will say/do)

When abuse/neglect skyrockets due to women’s issues raising their rape babies

When poverty/welfare goes up when women were barely surviving before getting pregnant have a baby

When there is Abuse from men furious about now supporting a child neither he or she wants

When all that starts happening I’m curious how all the state and National Republicans cheering this decision now are going to pivot and try to blame the Libs for it all

 

[SystemShock]

This is simple either the fault is with the candidate, or the voters. There is no reason to try and obfuscate this. It's a simple discussion.

Here is the only statement you need to reply to from any further discussion: What would you do with Bernie Bro's going forward? How do you solve this "problem"? if you can't give an answer, we are done.

I wanted you to realize that logic of blaming voting blocks like Bernie Bro's is exclusionary. It leads to no critical thought about the candidates mistakes, nor how to correct them in the future.

It's funny, but this is essentially your argument. It's really funny when you think about the fact that progressives tend to be younger voters.

I don't know why I only need to answer that particular question... I never posited what to do with the "Bernie Bros". In any case...

The "Bernie Bros" were too stupid to realize the moment in history they were in. They had a choice: throw their support behind the candidate that would have continued their progressive agendas, or throw a tantrum and in protest waste their votes by voting Green Party or not voting at all.

They chose the latter, and in the process, greatly aided the guy who was against every progressive agenda they care about... and here we are, with a 6-3 SC split and Row v Wade allegedly about to go down in flames

So what would I do with the "Bernie Bros"? I'd like to smack them across the face, but since that'd present a logistical nightmare, I can only hope they realize the age they helped usher, and use their brains the next opportunity they have.

So I answered. I guess I don't need to go any further.

 

[coldseat]

This is the true story of a 3rd trimester abortion. You all need to read this. This woman would have died had she not been able to get her abortion, had she been made to take her abnormal pregnancy to term. There wasn’t any indication that something was wrong until 28 weeks, and even then, they didn’t know how bad it was until they did the abortion. But this is what the Rs, the evangelicals, and the Catholics are doing, they are injecting themselves into her medical care. They are sentencing someone like her to death. The Boston clinic where she started says they refer someone like her to the clinic where she ended up 2x every month, so you cannot say this situation is extremely rare. I feel sick to my stomach knowing that people are so contemptuous of women’s lives that they want to punish women like her. They want to deny her the very best care that modern medicine can provide, knowing that it may well kill these women. These women who have families, who have other children. I cannot believe we have such cruelty in supposedly Christian people.

Rivers of Babylon: The Story of a Third-Trimester Abortion - The Rumpus

She said something to me, then, that has been a great comfort. “You had a choice,” she said, “but you did not have free will.” A choice that was no choice at all.

therumpus.net

Wow. That was a long and tragic read, but definitely worth the time if one is interested in truly understanding why some woman need a 3rd trimester abortion. This conclusion was very poignant:

Because of the nature of the abortion fight in the country, let me say this plainly: what happened to me was not the clinic’s fault. It was not the doctor’s fault. It was not his staff’s fault. There was no error of medical judgment or medical practice. It is the fault of forty years of pushing abortion care out of hospitals and stigmatizing and marginalizing women and care providers to the point where only four doctors in the United States are foolish enough to risk getting shot point-blank every day on their way to work to provide late-term abortions. It is the fault of legislators terrorizing physicians with spurious investigations instead of funding abortion research and finding ways to make the procedure safer. It is the fault of giving extremist, hateful, radicalizing discourse equal airtime with scientific fact and medical expertise. What would it look like, if we truly funded women’s healthcare? I wish I knew.