The Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO.
“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division.”
The document, labeled as a first draft of the majority opinion, includes a notation that it was circulated among the justices on Feb. 10. If the Alito draft is adopted, it would rule in favor of Mississippi in the closely watched case over that state’s attempt to ban most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.
POLITICO received a copy of the draft opinion from a person familiar with the court’s proceedings in the Mississippi case along with other details supporting the authenticity of the document. The draft opinion runs 98 pages, including a 31-page appendix of historical state abortion laws. The document is replete with citations to previous court decisions, books and other authorities, and includes 118 footnotes. The appearances and timing of this draft are consistent with court practice.
Apparently the draft has five supporters and three dissenters. It's unclear where Judge Roberts stands on the issue but the belief is that he will likely write his own opinion, possibly with some different reasons for supporting and upholding the Mississippi law.
This would obviously be one of the (if not the) biggest court decisions in decades. Roe v Wade has always been contentious and it was never sound. It was a ruling looking for an legal excuse for reasoning. Logically and legally it was only a matter of time until at least five justices had the courage to do the correct thing legally and take the political heat.
Obviously this is just "leaked" information that might be partially fabricated, totally fabricated, or a miscommunication. Wouldn't be the first time Politico (and others) were leaked completely false information. So time will tell.
Politically the issue is probably not front and center as it has been in the past. But I am sure it will ruffle some feathers and it will be interesting to see the guttural screams coming from the left (along with the natural lies about what it means). Many Americans falsely believe that Roe is what makes abortion legal ad without it, abortion would be banned. But in fact Roe and Casey are the rulings that protects abortion from overly strict regulation. States that have liberal abortion laws will not be affected one bit by the ruling. It will likely remain legal in all 50 states, at least for some time. This ruling (if true) will simply prevent successful lawsuits that challenge laws that are considered overly restrictive of abortion.
Between Roe and Casey, the line has always been viability. But even that changes as we advance medically. If we are able to someday grow a human outside of the womb, then technically Casey would cease to have any bite. It would be argued that any conception could be viable under the right medical conditions.
195 comments:
Watching the left lose their shit over the prospect of losing their "right" to commit infanticide is absolutely fascinating.
These people are the most evil fucking ghouls to ever walk the earth.
Only 30% of Americans support overturning Roe v Wade
Right now this is a critical time in American history.
If this increases turnout in record numbers and the Democrats win record numbers, they may attempt to increase the number of justices like FDR tried.
And get rid of the filibuster
How we got here
Roe has been law for almost 50 years, and Democrats — who almost universally support it — have won five of the past eight presidential elections. How, then, did an anti-Roe Supreme Court majority happen?
Circumstance plays a role. Donald Trump was able to appoint three justices, because of retirement or death — the most appointments in a single term in decades. But two specific decisions also loom over the potential repeal of Roe:
In 2016, after Justice Antonin Scalia died, Mitch McConnell and other Senate Republicans refused to allow Barack Obama to appoint a replace during his final year in office. It was an aggressive power grab with little precedent, and it worked, after Trump won that year’s election.In 2013 and 2014, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg decided not to retire, even though Obama could have appointed her replacement and Democrats controlled the Senate. She was enjoying her job as a justice, and she ignored pleas from other progressives, who specifically warned that she could be threatening abortion access.
Barrett now occupies Ginsburg’s old seat, and Gorsuch occupies Scalia’s. Without both of those votes, Roe would probably not fall. During oral arguments, Roberts appeared to prefer a compromise that would have allowed states to ban abortion at 15 weeks; such a decision would have outlawed only a small percentage of abortions.
Four of them were appointed by a President who did not win the popular vote
Tim Pool
https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/1521468847785750532
Pro choice, pro vaccine mandate
It is not a contradiction
they say my body my choice, your body my choice
They get to decide how their body is affected and your body
they try to have it both ways
heads they win, tails you lose
roger thinks that's fair
he sees both sides
Four of them were appointed by a President who did not win the popular vote
So?
thebradfordfile
https://twitter.com/thebradfordfile/status/1521328620949708800
LOL. All of the sudden Democrats stopped saying "birthing person."
1984
Anonymous Caliphate4vr said...
Four of them were appointed by a President who did not win the popular vote
So?
That matters to highly partisan, very small thinkers.
LOL. All of the sudden Democrats stopped saying "birthing person."
And just as suddenly, every leftist in America is a fucking biologist.
That 'pregnant man' emoji just lost virtually all of it's validity.
No Roger, most Americans support 1st trimester choice only.
New polling provided to Secrets Monday showed that 84% want voter ID, and huge percentages of black and Hispanic voters are behind the surge in support as the nation readies for the fall congressional midterm elections.
The polling from the Honest Elections Project for two groups, the American Legislative Exchange Council and the National Conference of State Legislatures, is the latest to show that the push by Biden and his media allies has fallen flat, especially among minorities who the president claimed would be hurt by election integrity laws passed in states such as Georgia.
“Photo ID laws are a case in point: Support for photo ID laws is seven points higher than a year ago. Left-wing special interests and politicians like President Biden carried out an intense, often misleading, campaign meant to stir opposition to policies like strong voter ID. Their efforts have had the opposite effect. More people than ever — including most black and Hispanic voters — back photo ID laws,” said the polling analysis provided to Secrets.
The memo to the two groups also highlighted support for a ban on outside funding of elections, which would have blocked a controversial organization funded by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg that boosted turnout in Democratic areas in the 2020 election.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/most-84-demand-voter-id-want-zuckerbucks-banned
Expect a return to this shit -
New York’s own Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, tried Thursday to walk back the direct threats he made to Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — but he only dug the hole deeper.
“I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions,” he huffed at a pro-abortion rally Wednesday. His goal: To intimidate the court to nix a Louisiana law requiring abortion providers to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.
That’s an outrageous threat.
Schumer now claims he misspoke. Despite his crystal-clear words, he says, he wasn’t vowing “violence” against the jurists — but “political consequences” for President Trump and Senate Republicans if the court backed the Louisiana law.
Please. Schumer well knows the difference between justices, whom he called out by name, and the president and senators. Nor did he offer the men an apology.
https://nypost.com/2020/03/05/chuck-schumers-threat-to-justices-just-new-low-in-democrats-scotus-bullying/
Watching the left lose their shit over the prospect of losing their "right" to commit infanticide is absolutely fascinating.
What is even more fascinating is the bigot rat who thinks all beaners should be shot when they cross the border, has a conscious for a subject he has no dog in the fight....I wonder when the last time he got laid????? Since as a man. who the fuck is he to interfere with the privacy of a women and what she can or cannot so......WHatg a colossal shit stain of a human.....>BWAAAAAAPAAAAAA!!!
I support abortion only if the life of the mother is at risk, or if the infant has serious issues, and of course rape or incest after the first trimester.
President Biden on Tuesday released a lengthy statement in response to the leak of a draft opinion that suggests the U.S. Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide.
On Monday night, Politico published the draft of a majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito in which he states that “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start.”
Scroll to continue with contentAd
“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” Alito writes, referencing the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey case that reaffirmed Roe. “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
“We do not know whether this draft is genuine, or whether it reflects the final decision of the Court,” Biden said in his statement. “With that critical caveat, I want to be clear on three points about the cases before the Supreme Court.
US President Joe Biden delivers remarks at the memorial service of former Vice President Walter Mondale in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on May 1, 2022. (Photo by Nicholas Kamm / AFP) (Photo by NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images)More
“First, my administration argued strongly before the Court in defense of Roe v. Wade,” Biden continued. “We said that Roe is based on ‘a long line of precedent recognizing ‘the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty’… against government interference with intensely personal decisions.’ I believe that a woman’s right to choose is fundamental, Roe has been the law of the land for almost fifty years, and basic fairness and the stability of our law demand that it not be overturned.
“Second, shortly after the enactment of Texas law SB 8 and other laws restricting women’s reproductive rights, I directed my Gender Policy Council and White House Counsel’s Office to prepare options for an Administration response to the continued attack on abortion and reproductive rights, under a variety of possible outcomes in the cases pending before the Supreme Court. We will be ready when any ruling is issued.
“Third, if the Court does overturn Roe, it will fall on our nation’s elected officials at all levels of government to protect a woman’s right to choose. And it will fall on voters to elect pro-choice officials this November. At the federal level, we will need more pro-choice Senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe, which I will work to pass and sign into law.”
Let us know, Ch, when we are able to grow a human outside the "whom."
It's obvious that Slow Joe graduated near the very bottom of his class at SU Law.
If the Democrats have a 2018 election day they will probably pass. But pro choice? We will see
"At the federal level, we will need more pro-choice Senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe, which I will work to pass and sign into law.”
This will be the strategy
"And it will fall on voters to elect pro-choice officials this November. At the federal level, we will need more pro-choice Senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe, which I will work to pass and sign into law."
President Biden
Legal insurrection website
Biden: ‘I Believe That a Woman’s Right to Choose is Fundamental’
“At the federal level, we need more pro-choice Senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe, which I will work to pass and sign into law.”
Posted by Mary ChastainTuesday, May 3, 2022 at 10:02am3 Comments
Share This StoryFacebookTwitterTelegramGabMeWeRedditEmail
Our devout Catholic president, ladies and gentlemen. Not only does he support abortion but he urges people to vote for pro-choice officials.
“At the federal level, we need more pro-choice Senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe, which I will work to pass and sign into law.”
Disgusting.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-potential-shock-move-abortion-sends-protesters-onto-washington-2022-05-03/
Americans Are SPLIT on Abortion
[WITH THE MAJORITY, BOTH MEN AND WOMEN,
FAVORING A WOMAN'S RIGHT CHOOSE]
May 3, 2022 at 7:51 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 86 Comments
A Reuters/Ipsos poll from December found
23% of Americans believe abortion should be legal in all cases and
26% believe it should be legal in most cases.
In contrast,
25% believe abortion should be illegal in most cases, and
12% believe it should be illegal in all cases.
Americans are also split on who should decide whether abortion is legal or not:
38% say the federal government,
34% say each state government, and
28% are unsure.
MOST AMERICANS, MEN AND ESPECIALLY WOMEN, SUPPORT A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE
46% BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE LEGAL IN ALL OR MOST CASES
37% BELIEVE IT SHOULD ILLEGAL IN ALL OR MOST CASES
38% SAY IT SHOULD BE UP TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
34% SAY IT SHOULD BE UP TO THE STATE GOVERNMENT IN EACH STATE
28% ARE UNSURE AS TO WHICH, FEDERAL OR STATE GOVERNMENT, IT SHOULD BE UP TO
Who Leaked the Supreme Court Draft Opinion?
May 3, 2022 at 7:23 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 97 Comments
David Leonhardt:
“Because of the leaked draft — a leak with no modern precedent at the court — any justice who switched sides would become notorious as the conservative who saved Roe.
“Some observers think it might have been a conservative justice or clerk, to lock in the majority. Others think it might have been a liberal justice or clerk, to undermine the court’s reputation as a high-minded body above the partisan fray; the leak makes the court look more like other Washington institutions.”
Mike Allen:
“These are the kinds of leaks you see in normal, electoral politics — from campaigns, from Congress and at times from within the executive branch. In those contexts, they’re usually an effort by the leaker to either stop something from happening or embarrass the people who made it happen.”
Why Roe v. Wade Is About to Fall
[WHO IS MOST RESPONSIBLE?]
May 3, 2022 at 6:45 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 222 Comments
Playbook:
“We knew this was coming. Ever since last December’s oral arguments in the Mississippi abortion case, it seemed likely that there was a majority on the court to overrule Roe and Casey.
“But while not a surprise, it was still shocking to see Alito’s words in black and white.
The draft opinion, if it holds, would be the culmination of half a century of legal conservatives organizing around the idea that Roe was wrongly decided and needed to be reversed.
“They have, above all else,
three people to thank:
(1) President George W. Bush,
WHO LOST THE POPULAR VOTE
who appointed Alito;
(2) then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell,
who blocked President Barack Obama from filling a Supreme Court vacancy;
OBAMA WAS ELECTED BY A LARGE MAJORITY
and
(3) President Donald Trump,
WHO LOST THE POPULAR VOTE
who appointed three conservative justices, all of whom seem prepared to back some version of the Alito opinion.”
“They can also thank two unusual features of the American system:
(1) a Senate in which McConnell was able to gain control
without Senate Republicans representing a majority of Americans,
and
(2) an Electoral College system
in which both Bush and Trump became president
despite losing the popular vote.”
THERE MAY BE HELL TO PAY, REPUBLICANS. AMERICANS DO NOT LIKE TO BE OVERRULED!!!
Quote of the Day
May 3, 2022 at 6:27 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 36 Comments
“If the report is accurate, the Supreme Court is poised to inflict the greatest restriction of rights in the past fifty years – not just on women but on all Americans. The Republican-appointed Justices’ reported votes to overturn Roe v. Wade would go down as an abomination, one of the worst and most damaging decisions in modern history.”
— Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, in a joint statement quoted by Punchbowl News.
BETTER WATCH OUT!
A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS HAVE NOT BEEN ALLOWED TO SPEAK ON THIS!
AND AMERICANS ARE GETTING VERY TIRED OF BEING OVERRULED. (SEE ABOVE.)
Biden: ‘I Believe That a Woman’s Right to Choose is Fundamental’
And the right like rat, think all women should walk 5 steps behind their man and follow their tenet that the government controls their body!!!!!! The GOP which rules by minority edicts is about to find out what the wrath of women really is!!!!!!!
I support abortion only if the life of the mother is at risk, or if the infant has serious issues, and of course rape or incest after the first trimester.
You are a crazy anti-choice bigot, Roger!
It's like Oprah... You get an abortion! You get an abortion! You get an abortion! Everyone gets an abortion!
Since democrats have been telling us how men can now get pregnant, I guess it's no longer a women's issue
You are a hypocrite Ch.
You earlier supported a woman's right to choose and said the Methodist church's moderate stance on abortion was "reasonable."
But now you've drunk the Trump Kool-Aid....
Must apologize to the Reverend who caught the "whom" vs "womb" situation... as I was writing this on my way to the airport. I am sure glad that the Reverend got to the point of all of this, by uncorrecting what was likely an auto-correct.
But it has been fixed now... so let's see if the Reverend had anything tangible to say other than spouting poll numbers (as if this decision would make abortion illegal).
Like a lot of liberals, Roe and Casey confuse them...
Reverend...
I have no issues with abortion. I believe that women should be able to choose to have an abortion in many situations. I am probably left of the average American on this subject (and certainly left of Roger)...
as most Americans believe it should only be a first trimester deal (which would be consistent with the 15 week laws).
The difference is that I don't believe that the courts should just create a constitutional right out of thin air (which Roe did and Casey expanded) just because I believe abortion should be legal. Either there is a real constitutional right or there isn't. Quite frankly there never was.
If the people of a particular State want to make tougher abortion standards and that is what the majority of people want in that state, then that is how a constitutional Republic works.
Don't like it... move!
How do you a justify a GOP position
THAT DOES NOT HAVE THE SUPPORT OF,
AND HAS THE STRONG OPPOSITION OF,
A MAJORITY OF MEN AND EVEN LARGER AND STRONGER OPPOSITION OF WOMEN? (SEE ABOVE.)
TWO PRESIDENTS WHO LOST THE POPULAR VOTE AND A SENATE THAT REPRESENTS A MINORITY OF AMERICANS ARE GOING TO TRY TO IMPOSE THIS ON AMERICA.
Reverend...
Your polling does not suggest what you want it to mean.
An overturn of Roe would not change a single law in a single state. It would only make it easier for certain states to (in the future) further restrict it.
Also.. you are looking at a minority opinions across the board. And in all polling where the number of weeks and such are brought up, the majority of Americans tend to be against any abortions that happen outside of the first trimester.
So not sure what you want me to address...
You are obviously wanting to strawman what I actually stand for and completely misrepresent what Roe and Casey actually do, while insisting that your polling means something it doesn't.
Btw... since you are anti-science and believe that life does not begin at conception (as biology proves) - can you clarify from a religious standpoint why it is okay to take a human life (from a biological standpoint)? Where in the bible does it say that killing someone is okay if that person might be a burden or if the person chooses not to care for them?
WHAT IF
Democrats now do away with the filibuster to get federal legislation that will make abortion nationally legal?
Where in the Bible does it say that men and women cannot practice birth control?
It doesn't.
So why does the Catholic church still (rather lamely) PRETEND to be opposed to birth control?
https://news.gallup.com/poll/235469/trimesters-key-abortion-views.aspx
THis is a little old, but it has been consistent if not trending against loose abortion standards - this link shows similar results over the past year or so...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2021/11/30/how-americans-really-feel-about-abortion-the-sometimes-surprising-poll-results-as-supreme-court-weighs-overturning-roe-v-wade/?sh=1071a90a36c9
- Six in 10 Americans broadly support abortion rights in first trimester
- Support shrinks to less than one-third in second trimester, further in third
- Americans divided on aborting because of Down syndrome
So technically this Gallup poll shows that less than a third of Americans would be against the Texas law that bans abortions after 15 weeks (which is already a week or more into the second trimester).
Again... if people are "informed" - then they would be in favor of the Texas law and against the concept of Casey (which allows abortions almost until the third trimester).
Well Reverend...
You certainly have a bad view of your bible and obviously don't respect it other than the portions that conform to your "politics". I am unsure why you consider yourself a clergy for such a fucked up religion (by your own standards).
So let's just be honest...
Your views on abortion are 100% political and completely ignore the bible or science. So at least be honest with that.
So let's just be honest...
BWAAAAAAAAA!!!!! Something you would not know if it was sucking on your old white ass, Lil Schitty.!!!!! Again, amusing an atheist telling a preach what the bible says......as to science WTF has that to do with repealing Roe?????? It is your opinion that you are trying to cram down all women's throats.....why should they believe in your opinion????? You hypocritical fucking liar!!!!
Inflation and crime rate will not matter in November.
For the first time, voters should be compelled to focus not only on their own anger and frustration over rising prices, growing rates of violent crime and a surge in illegal immigration. Their ballots this fall will not be a mere protest vote against the direction of the country and the slim Democratic majority’s ineptitude at changing it; 2022 will also be a referendum on the GOP agenda.
The question — now thrown into sharper relief — is whether Americans want to hand the direction of the country over to a party that is likely to outlaw or severely restrict abortion in half or more of the states, but also make it harder to vote, allow the banning of books and airbrush the teaching of race relations in this country. If a Republican president is elected in 2024 and is backed up by a GOP-led Congress, Republicans could be expected to try all these things on a national level.
That the conservative court is willing to overturn Roe v. Wade is not in itself a surprise. Politico, which first reported the draft authored by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., noted that it was written in February, so there is a possibility that the court’s thinking might have shifted and will continue to. But the starkness of the language — “We hold that Roe ... must be overruled” — takes the issue out of the realm of the theoretical. As does Alito’s assertion that this decision would “return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
He is absolutely right about that.
Alito’s assertion that this decision would “return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
He is absolutely right about that.
It is difficult to predict what will happen in the next six months but if the Democrats frame it as a referendum on the GOP , they will repeat 2018×2
In 15 weeks that is too short because most women don't know if they are pregnant yet.
The problem with Texas is that vigilantes can hunt people down and charge them for a crime.
I do not like abortion, and am internally divided on where/when lines should be drawn on allowing it to be performed,
but I can assure you that Republicans are not going to be able to make this decision for women.
Republicans have long been getting elected on the promise to end abortion and have then backed away from that promise because of the politics involved.
Republicans may find out that with this potential overthrowing of Roe vs. Wade they have released a political tiger on themselves.
It is my own fervent wish that we would all agree to try to decrease the number of abortions throughout the world by encouraging greater responsibilty regarding sex, including the practice of birth control based on the best science we have today.
15 weeks is just short of 4 months Roger. 5-6 weeks is the latest when most women would know. By 15 weeks they would have missed multiple periods.
No way women do not know by 15 weeks.
The bottom line that the Democrats have to win to stop this!
Leave it to Texas to come up with a way to violate women’s constitutional rights with a modern twist on vigilante justice.
At least eight states have passed laws that purport to prohibit abortions early in pregnancy — so-called fetal heartbeat laws that would bar abortion as early as six weeks, before many women even know they are pregnant. “Purport to” is the operative phrase here, however. Because these laws are clearly unconstitutional — at least until the Supreme Court says differently — federal judges have stepped in to block them from taking effect.
Sign up for a weekly roundup of thought-provoking ideas and debates
Now Texas has come up with a mechanism to end-run the federal courts — or so it believes. The state’s new law bars abortion once there is a “detectable” fetal heartbeat. But it prohibits state government officials from enforcing the ban. Instead, it outsources that job to private individuals — antiabortion vigilantes — who are deputized to go to state court to sue anyone who performs a supposedly illegal abortion or “aids or abets” such a procedure.
Their reward? A bounty of at least $10,000, plus legal costs. Imagine what that might mean in Texas, the state that brought you Roe v. Wade.
Follow Ruth Marcus's opinions
This is harassment waiting to happen. Anyone opposed to abortion could sue anyone — the relatives of a woman seeking an abortion, a counselor who phones a clinic to make an appointment, any doctor or nurse involved in the procedure — anywhere in the state at any time. If the law takes effect as scheduled on Sept. 1, the ensuing risk and chaos would shut down abortion providers in the state. Which is, of course, the goal.
Welcome to Deadwood South Dakota.
Have you been to the Number 10 bar 🍸
I still support 23 weeks.
Anyone know who leaked it?
You realize if Roe is struck down that there is no actual right (constitutional or otherwise) to an abortion. The constitution itself never provided it. It was just Roe.
Roger sounds like an idiot every time he suggests that this will override all the other issues tanking this administration and the dem party.
Right after the 1972 flood I went to
Saloon No. 10 was originally located on placer claim number 10 from which it derived its name. It was a favorite of the Gold Boomer and pilgrim alike, being the preferred watering hole of Wild Bill Hickok, Calamity Jane, Colorado Charlie Utter, Texas Jack, California Joe, Buffalo Bill Cody, Doc Holliday, Poker Alice, Wyatt Earp and of course, Potato Creek Johnny.
Fire Swept the gulch in 1879 destroying the entire town. The wooden shed called No. 10 was lost, but not it’s legacy which lives today in the Old Style – Saloon No. 10.
A friend of mine went behind the red door and paid for sex and lost his virginity!
They shut down the prostitution business in 1974.
Of course I know that no actual right (constitutional or otherwise) to an abortion in the constitution.
All five of the justices in 1973 had been appointed by Republican Presidents.
Blogger The Real Halfbaked Soars Pundit said...
In 15 weeks that is too short because most women don't know if they are pregnant yet.
You know as much about biology as you do history.
Women have a cycle every 4 weeks you idiot
Roberts Orders Investigation of Supreme Court Leak
May 3, 2022 at 11:31 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 5 Comments
Chief Justice John Roberts said that the leaked draft opinion that proposes overturning Roe v. Wade is authentic but not final, and he is opening an investigation into how it became public, the Washington Post reports.
Said Roberts: “To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. The work of the Court will not be affected in any way.”
IT ALREADY HAS BEEN.
____________
Personally, I am internally divided on the issue of abortion, when and where lines should be drawn on allowing it to be performed, but I can assure Republicans that they will not be successful in determining this for women.
Often in the past Republicans have been elected on the promise to end abortion only to back away from that promise because of the politics involved.
Republicans may learn that in the possible overturning of Roe vs. Wade they have unleashed a political tiger on themselves.
Personally, I wish we could all unite in seeking to decrease the number of abortions in the world by encouraging reponsibilty regarding sex, including the use of birth control based on the best science now available.
Roberts Orders Investigation of Supreme Court Leak
May 3, 2022 at 11:31 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 5 Comments
Chief Justice John Roberts said that the leaked draft opinion that proposes overturning Roe v. Wade is authentic but not final, and he is opening an investigation into how it became public, the Washington Post reports.
Said Roberts: “To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. The work of the Court will not be affected in any way.”
IT ALREADY HAS BEEN.
____________
Personally, I am internally divided on the issue of abortion, when and where lines should be drawn on allowing it to be performed, but I can assure Republicans that they will not be successful in determining this for women.
Often in the past Republicans have been elected on the promise to end abortion only to back away from that promise because of the politics involved.
Republicans may learn that in the possible overturning of Roe vs. Wade they have unleashed a political tiger on themselves.
Personally, I wish we could all unite in seeking to decrease the number of abortions in the world by encouraging reponsibilty regarding sex, including the use of birth control based on the best science now available.
Roberts Orders Investigation of Supreme Court Leak
May 3, 2022 at 11:31 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 5 Comments
Chief Justice John Roberts said that the leaked draft opinion that proposes overturning Roe v. Wade is authentic but not final, and he is opening an investigation into how it became public, the Washington Post reports.
Said Roberts: “To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. The work of the Court will not be affected in any way.”
IT ALREADY HAS BEEN.
____________
Personally, I am internally divided on the issue of abortion, when and where lines should be drawn on allowing it to be performed, but I can assure Republicans that they will not be successful in determining this for women.
Often in the past Republicans have been elected on the promise to end abortion only to back away from that promise because of the politics involved.
Republicans may learn that in the possible overturning of Roe vs. Wade they have unleashed a political tiger on themselves.
Personally, I wish we could all unite in seeking to decrease the number of abortions in the world by encouraging reponsibilty regarding sex, including the use of birth control based on the best science now available.
Roberts Orders Investigation of Supreme Court Leak
May 3, 2022 at 11:31 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 5 Comments
Chief Justice John Roberts said that the leaked draft opinion that proposes overturning Roe v. Wade is authentic but not final, and he is opening an investigation into how it became public, the Washington Post reports.
Said Roberts: “To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. The work of the Court will not be affected in any way.”
IT ALREADY HAS BEEN.
____________
Personally, I am internally divided on the issue of abortion, when and where lines should be drawn on allowing it to be performed, but I can assure Republicans that they will not be successful in determining this for women.
Often in the past Republicans have been elected on the promise to end abortion only to back away from that promise because of the politics involved.
Republicans may learn that in the possible overturning of Roe vs. Wade they have unleashed a political tiger on themselves.
Personally, I wish we could all unite in seeking to decrease the number of abortions in the world by encouraging reponsibilty regarding sex, including the use of birth control based on the best science now available.
somebody has been deleting me again (F daddy, to be sure)
that's why the multiple posts
somebody has been deleting me again (f daddy, to be sure)
that's why the multiple posts
somebody has been deleting me again (f daddy, to be sure)
that's why the multiple posts
somebody has been deleting me again (f daddy, to be sure)
that's why the multiple posts
somebody has been deleting me again (f daddy, to be sure)
that's why the multiple posts
somebody has been deleting me again (f daddy, to be sure)
that's why the multiple posts
I support abortion in the first trimester.
After the third trimester I support abortion
1: if the life of the mother is at risk
2: if the infant has serious issues, the parents should have the right to choose whether or not to perform an abortion. It gets very difficult. If the child will have serious problems.
3: and of course rape or incest during or after the first trimester.
Like I said before that I know a friend was raped by a police officer when she was 13.
I didn't find out until decades later.
Republicans would have required her to have the baby.
You know Reverend... only the Administrator (me) or the author can delete comments. I have not deleted anyone's comments, nor have I seen any that disappeared.
Several of my posts have been deleted
Fuck yourself Scott
Ch says:
You realize if Roe is struck down that there is no actual right (constitutional or otherwise) to an abortion. The constitution itself never provided it. It was just Roe.
QUESTION:
Where in the Constitution is it stated that the federal government has no right to allow or prohibt abortion?
Or, for example, where in the Constituion is is stated that the federal government has no right to allow or prohibit the use of drinking alcohol?
Believe me, I posted several that disappeared more than once until I repeatedly posted them.
Scott I posted this
I support abortion in the first trimester.
After that
1;only if the life of the mother is at risk.
2:the infant has serious issues,
3; and of course rape or incest after the first trimester
It disappeared.
Scott I posted this
I support abortion in the first trimester.
After that
1;only if the life of the mother is at risk.
2:the infant has serious issues,
3; and of course rape or incest after the first trimester
It disappeared.
Scott I posted this
I support abortion in the first trimester.
After that
1;only if the life of the mother is at risk.
2:the infant has serious issues,
3; and of course rape or incest after the first trimester
It disappeared.
They keep disappeared
And the short one above where I called attention to the fact that I was being deleted I posted three times, one of which was deleted.
Same for the three/two above it.
QUESTION:
Where in the Constitution is it stated that the federal government has no right to allow or prohibt abortion?
No where, pedo
But the 10th Amendment says
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
And that’s where it should be decided in the states and if this is correct it goes back to the states
You SIMPLETON
Chief Justice Roberts has activated the Marshall of the Court to find the leaker and take legal action.
This Will disappear soon
Conservatives are doing a victory lap in light of a recent report that the Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision establishing the constitutional right to abortion, while at the same time seemingly having a complete meltdown about the potential impact of its release.
The bombshell report came late Monday evening, when Politico published a leaked draft of Associate Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion, written back in February, rehashing the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which upheld Roe in 1992. According to the outlet, the draft is "a full-throated, unflinching repudiation" of both laws.
"Roe was egregiously wrong from the start," Alito reportedly wrote in his opinion. "We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled."
This week, conservative pundits and politicians immediately praised the controversial draft, which culminates a decades-long campaign by Republicans to roll back reproductive rights all across the nation.
On Monday, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., a vehement anti-abortion advocate, called the court's alleged draft "a heck of an opinion."
"Voluminously researched, tightly argued, and morally powerful," he tweeted.
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem vowed to call a special session in support the potential decision's rollout.
"If this report is true and Roe v. Wade is overturned, I will immediately call for a special session to save lives and guarantee that every unborn child has a right to life in South Dakota," the governor tweeted.
Other conservatives railed against the leak of draft, arguing that the move impugns the court's apparent nonpartisanship.
"Leaking a draft SCOTUS ruling is worse than January 6th. The Court was the one institution where conservatives and liberals lived in peace and trust," wrote right-wing commentator Mike Cernovich. "You disagreed but the trust was sacred. This completely destroys the Court's inner workings. Totally in shock right now."
"To violate an understanding that has held for the entire modern history of the Court – seeking to place outside political pressure on the Court and the justices themselves – is dangerous, despicable, and damaging," echoed Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah.
Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., suggested the draft's leak was a coordinated assault by the left. "The next time you hear the far left preaching about how they are fighting to preserve our Republic's institutions & norms remember how they leaked a Supreme Court opinion in an attempt to intimidate the justices on abortion," Rubio wrote.
Politico's report does not mark the first time that the draft of any pending Supreme Court case has been publicized before a ruling is made. While the draft offers an unprecedented glimpse into the bench's deliberations, which the court has historically kept strictly confidential, it is important to note that the original Roe v. Wade decision was similarly released, infuriating the court.
The most recent draft, no doubt a strong indication of the court's jurisprudence on abortion, is sure to set back the state of reproductive healthcare in America by a matter of decades. According to the Guttmacher Institute, If Roe v. Wade is overturned, at least 26 states will severely curtail abortion access or outlaw the practice altogether.
Roger calls for Violence against USSC Members and their families.
It did disappear
This Will disappear soon
Conservatives are doing a victory lap in light of a recent report that the Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision establishing the constitutional right to abortion, while at the same time seemingly having a complete meltdown about the potential impact of its release.
The bombshell report came late Monday evening, when Politico published a leaked draft of Associate Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion, written back in February, rehashing the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which upheld Roe in 1992. According to the outlet, the draft is "a full-throated, unflinching repudiation" of both laws.
"Roe was egregiously wrong from the start," Alito reportedly wrote in his opinion. "We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled."
This week, conservative pundits and politicians immediately praised the controversial draft, which culminates a decades-long campaign by Republicans to roll back reproductive rights all across the nation.
On Monday, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., a vehement anti-abortion advocate, called the court's alleged draft "a heck of an opinion."
"Voluminously researched, tightly argued, and morally powerful," he tweeted.
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem vowed to call a special session in support the potential decision's rollout.
"If this report is true and Roe v. Wade is overturned, I will immediately call for a special session to save lives and guarantee that every unborn child has a right to life in South Dakota," the governor tweeted.
Other conservatives railed against the leak of draft, arguing that the move impugns the court's apparent nonpartisanship.
"Leaking a draft SCOTUS ruling is worse than January 6th. The Court was the one institution where conservatives and liberals lived in peace and trust," wrote right-wing commentator Mike Cernovich. "You disagreed but the trust was sacred. This completely destroys the Court's inner workings. Totally in shock right now."
"To violate an understanding that has held for the entire modern history of the Court – seeking to place outside political pressure on the Court and the justices themselves – is dangerous, despicable, and damaging," echoed Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah.
Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., suggested the draft's leak was a coordinated assault by the left. "The next time you hear the far left preaching about how they are fighting to preserve our Republic's institutions & norms remember how they leaked a Supreme Court opinion in an attempt to intimidate the justices on abortion," Rubio wrote.
Politico's report does not mark the first time that the draft of any pending Supreme Court case has been publicized before a ruling is made. While the draft offers an unprecedented glimpse into the bench's deliberations, which the court has historically kept strictly confidential, it is important to note that the original Roe v. Wade decision was similarly released, infuriating the court.
The most recent draft, no doubt a strong indication of the court's jurisprudence on abortion, is sure to set back the state of reproductive healthcare in America by a matter of decades. According to the Guttmacher Institute, If Roe v. Wade is overturned, at least 26 states will severely curtail abortion access or outlaw the practice altogether.
This Will disappear soon
Conservatives are doing a victory lap in light of a recent report that the Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision establishing the constitutional right to abortion, while at the same time seemingly having a complete meltdown about the potential impact of its release.
The bombshell report came late Monday evening, when Politico published a leaked draft of Associate Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion, written back in February, rehashing the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which upheld Roe in 1992. According to the outlet, the draft is "a full-throated, unflinching repudiation" of both laws.
"Roe was egregiously wrong from the start," Alito reportedly wrote in his opinion. "We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled."
This week, conservative pundits and politicians immediately praised the controversial draft, which culminates a decades-long campaign by Republicans to roll back reproductive rights all across the nation.
On Monday, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., a vehement anti-abortion advocate, called the court's alleged draft "a heck of an opinion."
"Voluminously researched, tightly argued, and morally powerful," he tweeted.
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem vowed to call a special session in support the potential decision's rollout.
"If this report is true and Roe v. Wade is overturned, I will immediately call for a special session to save lives and guarantee that every unborn child has a right to life in South Dakota," the governor tweeted.
Other conservatives railed against the leak of draft, arguing that the move impugns the court's apparent nonpartisanship.
"Leaking a draft SCOTUS ruling is worse than January 6th. The Court was the one institution where conservatives and liberals lived in peace and trust," wrote right-wing commentator Mike Cernovich. "You disagreed but the trust was sacred. This completely destroys the Court's inner workings. Totally in shock right now."
"To violate an understanding that has held for the entire modern history of the Court – seeking to place outside political pressure on the Court and the justices themselves – is dangerous, despicable, and damaging," echoed Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah.
Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., suggested the draft's leak was a coordinated assault by the left. "The next time you hear the far left preaching about how they are fighting to preserve our Republic's institutions & norms remember how they leaked a Supreme Court opinion in an attempt to intimidate the justices on abortion," Rubio wrote.
Politico's report does not mark the first time that the draft of any pending Supreme Court case has been publicized before a ruling is made. While the draft offers an unprecedented glimpse into the bench's deliberations, which the court has historically kept strictly confidential, it is important to note that the original Roe v. Wade decision was similarly released, infuriating the court.
The most recent draft, no doubt a strong indication of the court's jurisprudence on abortion, is sure to set back the state of reproductive healthcare in America by a matter of decades. According to the Guttmacher Institute, If Roe v. Wade is overturned, at least 26 states will severely curtail abortion access or outlaw the practice altogether.
This Will disappear soon
Conservatives are doing a victory lap in light of a recent report that the Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision establishing the constitutional right to abortion, while at the same time seemingly having a complete meltdown about the potential impact of its release.
The bombshell report came late Monday evening, when Politico published a leaked draft of Associate Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion, written back in February, rehashing the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which upheld Roe in 1992. According to the outlet, the draft is "a full-throated, unflinching repudiation" of both laws.
"Roe was egregiously wrong from the start," Alito reportedly wrote in his opinion. "We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled."
This week, conservative pundits and politicians immediately praised the controversial draft, which culminates a decades-long campaign by Republicans to roll back reproductive rights all across the nation.
On Monday, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., a vehement anti-abortion advocate, called the court's alleged draft "a heck of an opinion."
"Voluminously researched, tightly argued, and morally powerful," he tweeted.
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem vowed to call a special session in support the potential decision's rollout.
"If this report is true and Roe v. Wade is overturned, I will immediately call for a special session to save lives and guarantee that every unborn child has a right to life in South Dakota," the governor tweeted.
Other conservatives railed against the leak of draft, arguing that the move impugns the court's apparent nonpartisanship.
"Leaking a draft SCOTUS ruling is worse than January 6th. The Court was the one institution where conservatives and liberals lived in peace and trust," wrote right-wing commentator Mike Cernovich. "You disagreed but the trust was sacred. This completely destroys the Court's inner workings. Totally in shock right now."
"To violate an understanding that has held for the entire modern history of the Court – seeking to place outside political pressure on the Court and the justices themselves – is dangerous, despicable, and damaging," echoed Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah.
Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., suggested the draft's leak was a coordinated assault by the left. "The next time you hear the far left preaching about how they are fighting to preserve our Republic's institutions & norms remember how they leaked a Supreme Court opinion in an attempt to intimidate the justices on abortion," Rubio wrote.
Politico's report does not mark the first time that the draft of any pending Supreme Court case has been publicized before a ruling is made. While the draft offers an unprecedented glimpse into the bench's deliberations, which the court has historically kept strictly confidential, it is important to note that the original Roe v. Wade decision was similarly released, infuriating the court.
The most recent draft, no doubt a strong indication of the court's jurisprudence on abortion, is sure to set back the state of reproductive healthcare in America by a matter of decades. According to the Guttmacher Institute, If Roe v. Wade is overturned, at least 26 states will severely curtail abortion access or outlaw the practice altogether.
Fucking go fuck yourself I'm done ✔️ good bye forever
This Will disappear soon
Conservatives are doing a victory lap in light of a recent report that the Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision establishing the constitutional right to abortion, while at the same time seemingly having a complete meltdown about the potential impact of its release.
The bombshell report came late Monday evening, when Politico published a leaked draft of Associate Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion, written back in February, rehashing the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which upheld Roe in 1992. According to the outlet, the draft is "a full-throated, unflinching repudiation" of both laws.
"Roe was egregiously wrong from the start," Alito reportedly wrote in his opinion. "We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled."
This week, conservative pundits and politicians immediately praised the controversial draft, which culminates a decades-long campaign by Republicans to roll back reproductive rights all across the nation.
On Monday, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., a vehement anti-abortion advocate, called the court's alleged draft "a heck of an opinion."
"Voluminously researched, tightly argued, and morally powerful," he tweeted.
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem vowed to call a special session in support the potential decision's rollout.
"If this report is true and Roe v. Wade is overturned, I will immediately call for a special session to save lives and guarantee that every unborn child has a right to life in South Dakota," the governor tweeted.
Other conservatives railed against the leak of draft, arguing that the move impugns the court's apparent nonpartisanship.
"Leaking a draft SCOTUS ruling is worse than January 6th. The Court was the one institution where conservatives and liberals lived in peace and trust," wrote right-wing commentator Mike Cernovich. "You disagreed but the trust was sacred. This completely destroys the Court's inner workings. Totally in shock right now."
"To violate an understanding that has held for the entire modern history of the Court – seeking to place outside political pressure on the Court and the justices themselves – is dangerous, despicable, and damaging," echoed Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah.
Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., suggested the draft's leak was a coordinated assault by the left. "The next time you hear the far left preaching about how they are fighting to preserve our Republic's institutions & norms remember how they leaked a Supreme Court opinion in an attempt to intimidate the justices on abortion," Rubio wrote.
Politico's report does not mark the first time that the draft of any pending Supreme Court case has been publicized before a ruling is made. While the draft offers an unprecedented glimpse into the bench's deliberations, which the court has historically kept strictly confidential, it is important to note that the original Roe v. Wade decision was similarly released, infuriating the court.
The most recent draft, no doubt a strong indication of the court's jurisprudence on abortion, is sure to set back the state of reproductive healthcare in America by a matter of decades. According to the Guttmacher Institute, If Roe v. Wade is overturned, at least 26 states will severely curtail abortion access or outlaw the practice altogether.
Good bye forever Scott you have lost your mind
You really have deleted a lot of things.
Like indy said 🙄
Supreme Court Live Updates: Supreme Court Confirms Leaked Opinion But Says the Draft Is Not a Final Decision
Leaked draft of Supreme Court ruling signals a seismic shift in American politics and law.
The leak of a draft Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade signaled a seismic shift in American politics and law, portending sweeping change for women in much of the country and upending the legislative and campaign landscape at every level of government just six months before midterm elections.
The morning after the disclosure of the opinion, protesters gathered outside the Supreme Court on Tuesday and could be heard across the street as members of Congress entered the Capitol. At the White House, President Biden called on voters to elect more abortion rights supporters to Congress so that lawmakers can codify the principles of Roe into federal law even if the justices reverse the decision.
Speaking with reporters, Mr. Biden said the potential ruling would undermine the right to privacy more broadly than just abortion, endangering a series of rights that Americans have come to expect. “If this decision holds, it’s really quite a radical decision,” he said. “It basically says all the decisions related to your private life, who you marry, whether or not you decide to conceive a child or not, whether or not you can have an abortion, a range of other decisions,” all of those could now be in question.
The Supreme Court, meanwhile, confirmed that the draft opinion, written in February, was real but stressed that it was not final. “Although the document described in yesterday’s reports is authentic, it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case,” the court said in a statement.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. ordered the marshal’s office to investigate the disclosure. “This was a singular and egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the Court and the community of public servants who work here,” he said in the same statement.
While the draft opinion was not final and may be changed before the court issues its decision within the next month or so, its publication made clear that a bedrock of American law for the last half-century was on the verge of being reversed. If the court follows through with some version of the opinion by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., the constitutional right to abortion first established by the court in 1973 will be negated and it will be left to the states to decide whether it should be legal or not, resulting in a patchwork of different laws across the country unless Congress steps in and sets a single national policy again.
Such a decision by the court would culminate a decades-long campaign by conservatives who argue that life begins at conception to appoint judges and justices to find that the Roe decision invented a right that did not exist in the Constitution. It would represent a devastating defeat for liberals who sought to guard women’s right to choose the procedure against years of efforts to chip away at the ruling.
If the Constitution neither permits nor prohibits alchohol,
how did we get prohibition?
Sure would be nice if Denny, James and Roger could express their own ideas.
The Hartmann Report (thomhartmann+daily-rant@substack.com)
Federal Abortion Ban:
Court Packing Should Be Back on the Table!
Abortion can be re-legalized if Democrats in Congress choose to set aside the filibuster and either pass a law codifying Roe or, with a more long-term strategy, add new members to the the Court
Thom Hartmann
May 3
Politico is reporting that the Supreme Court has already voted to strike down Roe v Wade and Planned Parenthood v Casey, and possibly even Griswold v Connecticut. The decision is in draft form, but expected to be released this summer.
The GOP first set this as a goal in 1981 with the election of Ronald Reagan who, prior to cutting a cynical deal with Jerry Falwell for church help in the 1980 election, had signed the most liberal abortion law in the nation as California governor. Now it appears their 41-year campaign has reached its fruition.
This is the first time in the lifetime of anybody living today that the Supreme Court has removed from our law a major “right” that directly or indirectly affects all Americans.
It’s an opinion that does not provide for exceptions for women or children who’ve been raped or are the victims of incest; for women whose age (young or older) puts them at high risk of death from childbirth; or even for a woman with comorbidities that usually rule out pregnancy.
It is, after all, 14 times more deadly for a woman to give birth than to get an abortion, and that’s for “normal” childbearing age women in good health.
By the time this decision is released we’ll have 24 states with so-called “trigger laws” in place that immediately ban abortion (and, in some cases, abortifacient drugs and/or morning-after pills) the minute the decision is announced.
America, within a few months, will almost certainly be a very different country from the one you lived in during the past 49 years unless Congress — while Democrats still control it — takes action.
That action can take one of two forms, both of which will require bypassing the filibuster (which Democrats today have the power to do; they just must find the will.)
Pass a Law
The first strategy is for Congress to pass a law that puts the essence of Roe and Casey into law.
This is the most straightforward path, and is what this decision by Alito specifically argues is the only way to protect abortion rights.
It can be done — if Democrats can waive the filibuster — in the next two months before this decision is finally handed down.
After all, the Supreme Court isn’t supposed to make law: that’s the job of Congress. And Democrats today control Congress.
The weakness with this path is that when Republicans seize control of Congress and the White House, perhaps as early as 2024, they can simply reverse the Democrats’ abortion-protecting law.
The other weakness of this strategy is that it doesn’t address the overall direction this new Alito decision is moving the Court. If Roe and Casey are gone, probably the Griswold protection for birth control rights and the Obgerfell protection for gay marriage are next.
The law was changed to prohibit booze, and it was changed back.
This happened legally with in the US Constitution.
Now James and Roger fail to understand the US Constitution .
Women Line Up Outside SCOTUS To Receive Their New Handmaid’s Tale Outfits
WASHINGTON, D.C.—With news coming out that the United States Supreme Court has overturned Roe v Wade, millions of women have accepted their fate and are lining up outside the SCOTUS building to receive their complimentary Handmaid's Tale uniforms.
"Well, I guess it has come to this—I'm a Handmaid now," said former pro-choice activist Pixie Stankbugg, draped head to toe in a red robe and wearing a white bonnet. "We tried to stop it, but we're officially in the Handmaid's Tale now. Now, where do I go to get impregnated by my assigned male Commander?"
The Biden Administration had promised to do everything it can to meet the demand for red robes and white bonnets.
"Don't worry, we're gonna order as many as we can so all you womenfolk can get a uniform," said Biden to a red towel draped over a bathroom hook that he mistook for a Handmaid. "Wow, you dames sure look attractive in those things. Do I get a handmaid too?"
Authorities tried to remind the nation's women that abortion law will just be in the hands of the states and no one has to be a Handmaid, but it was too late as the nation's feminists had already donned their uniforms and declared themselves the willing citizens of the theocratic government of Gilead.
No, the law was changed to allow booze and then changed back.
And that was done under a Constitution that neither permitted nor prohibited booze.
And could be done under our present Constitution re abortion.
Blogger Honest, decent, truthful Rev. said...
If the Constitution neither permits nor prohibits alchohol,
how did we get prohibition?
The 18th Amendment dumbass
Damn, you’re dumb
No, the law was changed to allow booze and then changed back.
And that was done under a Constitution that neither permitted nor prohibited booze.
And could be done under our present Constitution re abortion.
No, the law was changed to allow booze and then changed back.
And that was done under a Constitution that neither permitted nor prohibited booze.
And could be done under our present Constitution re abortion.
No, the law was changed to allow booze and then changed back.
And that was done under a Constitution that neither permitted nor prohibited booze.
And could be done under our present Constitution re abortion.
No, the law was changed to allow booze and then changed back.
And that was done under a Constitution that neither permitted nor prohibited booze.
And could be done under our present Constitution re abortion.
No, the law was changed to allow booze and then changed back.
And that was done under a Constitution that neither permitted nor prohibited booze.
And could be done under our present Constitution re abortion.
No, the law was changed to allow booze and then changed back.
And that was done under a Constitution that neither permitted nor prohibited booze.
And could be done under our present Constitution re abortion.
No, the law was changed to allow booze and then changed back.
And that was done under a Constitution that neither permitted nor prohibited booze.
And could be done under our present Constitution re abortion.
No, the law was changed to allow booze and then changed back.
And that was done under a Constitution that neither permitted nor prohibited booze.
And could be done under our present Constitution re abortion.
No, the law was changed to allow booze and then changed back.
And that was done under a Constitution that neither permitted nor prohibited booze.
And could be done under our present Constitution re abortion.
again, i was being deleted
again, i was being deleted
The Real Halfbaked Soars Pundit said...
I support abortion only if the life of the mother is at risk, or if the infant has serious issues, and of course rape or incest after the first trimester.
May 3, 2022 at 9:05 AM
The Real Halfbaked Soars Pundit said...
Scott I posted this
I support abortion in the first trimester.
After that
1;only if the life of the mother is at risk.
2:the infant has serious issues,
3; and of course rape or incest after the first trimester
It disappeared.
May 3, 2022 at 11:10 AM
-------------------------------------
Obviously something is going on with google blogger but it sure didn't delete roger's post. And it's amazing roger even thinks so because he and CHT even discussed that post. Forget already ? What is that a symptom of ?
They are also having issues with google chrome:
Google’s new Chrome 101 update fixes 29 huge security holes
Jacob Siegal
Mon, May 2, 2022, 11:34 AM
https://news.yahoo.com/google-chrome-101-fixes-29-153400662.html
and everyone here is having problems with the the lying POS charlatan "pastor" james boswell from Normal Illinois
For the last time I am not deleting anyones posts
Stop lying "pastor"
Though if I could I would gladly delete the stream of Goddard's spammed ones the "pastor" keeps posting from the political_lire blog.
No you’re fucking stupid
Section 1—After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.
Section 2—The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Section 3—This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
The 21st amendment overturned the 18th you stupid box of rocks
again, i was being deleted
funny, we get deleted when f daddy is not here and it stops when he shows up
I also posted the beginning of today's Hartman Report and it got deleted.
Honest, decent, truthful Rev. said...
No, the law was changed to allow booze and then changed back.
And that was done under a Constitution that neither permitted nor prohibited booze.
And could be done under our present Constitution re abortion.
May 3, 2022 at 11:44 AM
Blogger Honest, decent, truthful Rev. said...
No, the law was changed to allow booze and then changed back.
And that was done under a Constitution that neither permitted nor prohibited booze.
And could be done under our present Constitution re abortion.
May 3, 2022 at 11:45 AM
Blogger Honest, decent, truthful Rev. said...
again, i was being deleted
May 3, 2022 at 11:46 AM
Fuck off you little piece of shit "pastor"
looks like google is putting in some kind of delay or doing some kind of monitoring
Big Brother
probably in conjunction with the Ministry of "truth"
Hartmann
Dishonest, indecent, untruthful Rev. said...
again, i was being deleted
funny, we get deleted when f daddy is not here and it stops when he shows up
------------------------------------------
I OWN THE "pastor"
ROFLMFAO !!!
SOMEBODY REALLY DOESN'T WANT YOU TO SEE THIS:
Federal Abortion Ban:
Court Packing Should Be Back on the Table!
Abortion can be re-legalized if Democrats in Congress choose to set aside the filibuster and either pass a law codifying Roe or, with a more long-term strategy, add new members to the the Court
Thom Hartmann
May 3
Politico is reporting that the Supreme Court has already voted to strike down Roe v Wade and Planned Parenthood v Casey, and possibly even Griswold v Connecticut. The decision is in draft form, but expected to be released this summer.
The GOP first set this as a goal in 1981 with the election of Ronald Reagan who, prior to cutting a cynical deal with Jerry Falwell for church help in the 1980 election, had signed the most liberal abortion law in the nation as California governor. Now it appears their 41-year campaign has reached its fruition.
This is the first time in the lifetime of anybody living today that the Supreme Court has removed from our law a major “right” that directly or indirectly affects all Americans.
It’s an opinion that does not provide for exceptions for women or children who’ve been raped or are the victims of incest; for women whose age (young or older) puts them at high risk of death from childbirth; or even for a woman with comorbidities that usually rule out pregnancy.
It is, after all, 14 times more deadly for a woman to give birth than to get an abortion, and that’s for “normal” childbearing age women in good health.
By the time this decision is released we’ll have 24 states with so-called “trigger laws” in place that immediately ban abortion (and, in some cases, abortifacient drugs and/or morning-after pills) the minute the decision is announced.
America, within a few months, will almost certainly be a very different country from the one you lived in during the past 49 years unless Congress — while Democrats still control it — takes action.
That action can take one of two forms, both of which will require bypassing the filibuster (which Democrats today have the power to do; they just must find the will.)
Pass a Law
The first strategy is for Congress to pass a law that puts the essence of Roe and Casey into law.
This is the most straightforward path, and is what this decision by Alito specifically argues is the only way to protect abortion rights.
It can be done — if Democrats can waive the filibuster — in the next two months before this decision is finally handed down.
After all, the Supreme Court isn’t supposed to make law: that’s the job of Congress. And Democrats today control Congress.
The weakness with this path is that when Republicans seize control of Congress and the White House, perhaps as early as 2024, they can simply reverse the Democrats’ abortion-protecting law.
The other weakness of this strategy is that it doesn’t address the overall direction this new Alito decision is moving the Court. If Roe and Casey are gone, probably the Griswold protection for birth control rights and the Obgerfell protection for gay marriage are next.
Packing the Court
The second path is to reshape the Court itself, which could not only re-protect abortion rights but also protect birth control, gay marriage, and again make the court a champion for workers’ and environmental rights.
And there’s plenty of precedent for that process, although it would also require temporarily setting aside the filibuster.
Packing the Court in 1801:
Thomas Jefferson beat John Adams in the election of 1800, and so, during the lame-duck session of 1801, Adams’ Federalists (the conservative party at that time) passed the Judiciary Act of 1801 to cut the size of the Supreme Court from six members to five, purely to deny Jefferson an opportunity to make an appointment.
Jefferson’s Democratic-Republicans — today’s Democratic Party — reversed that in Congress and increased the number of members of the court to seven in 1802.
Packing the Court in 1866/1869:
In 1866, Republicans in the House and Senate passed a law to reduce the number of justices on the Supreme Court from ten to seven to deny Democratic President Andrew Johnson an opportunity to fill a seat opened up with the 1865 death of Associate Justice John Catron. Johnson was furious, but there was nothing he could do as Republicans held Congress.
Three years later, with Johnson out of the White House and Republican President Ulysses Grant safely in charge, they passed the Judiciary Act of 1869 that raised the number of justices up to nine, where it has stood till today.
Packing the Court in 1937:
During FDR’s presidency, four of the Supreme Court’s justices, Pierce Butler, James Clark McReynolds, George Sutherland, and Willis Van Devanter, were collectively known as the Four Horsemen. They were invariably joined by one of the other justices, particularly Justice Owen Roberts, to strike down New Deal legislation that attempted to address unemployment and poverty, no matter how popular it was.
For the preceding decades during the Lochner era, the Court had struck down dozens of state laws protecting workers, including women and children.
In 1935, the Supreme Court ruled that both the Agricultural Adjustment Act and the National Industrial Recovery Act were unconstitutional, gutting Roosevelt’s New Deal legislation.
The Agricultural Adjustment Act had passed in 1933 with 76 percent of the House of Representatives voting for it. The bill passed the Senate, also with 76 percent of the Senate voting for it.
Historian William Leuchtenburg wrote for Smithsonian magazine that after the Agricultural Adjustment Act was struck down, “Many farmers were incensed. On the night following [Justice Owen] Roberts’ opinion, a passerby in Ames, Iowa, discovered life-size effigies of the six majority opinion justices hanged by the side of a road.”
The National Industrial Recovery Act had likewise passed with 71 percent of the House voting for it and 81 percent of senators voting for it.
When the Supreme Court used its power of judicial review to overturn these laws, it wasn’t viewed just as an assault on FDR’s New Deal. It was, in the opinion of many Americans (and FDR himself), an assault on the very basis of our democratic republic.
Then, shortly before Roosevelt was reelected in 1936, the court struck down a New York state law that established a minimum wage for women and children in Morehead v. New York ex rel. Tipaldo.
And as historian David B. Woolner, author of The Last 100 Days: FDR at War and at Peace, noted, “Over… 13 months, the court struck down more pieces of legislation than at any other time in U.S. history.”
In 1937, the National Labor Relations Act and the Social Security Act (both passed in 1935) were on their way to the Court. Considering how the Four Horsemen had ruled during FDR’s first term, Roosevelt knew that he needed to do something or risk losing both pieces of legislation.
With the New Deal on the line, Roosevelt went on the attack. On February 5, 1937, just months after his landslide reelection, he announced his plan. He asked Congress for the authority to appoint one justice for each justice over 70 who would not retire.
Roosevelt’s plan would have immediately given him six appointments to the Supreme Court and up to 44 appointments for federal lower courts. Roosevelt argued that “[a] constant and systematic addition of younger blood will vitalize the courts.”
On March 9, 1937, Roosevelt told the nation that the court was ruling not just against himself and Congress, but against the will of the American people.
“The Courts,” Roosevelt told the nation, “have cast doubts on the ability of the elected Congress to protect us against catastrophe by meeting squarely our modern social and economic conditions.”
Roosevelt’s critics were aghast at his plans. They claimed he was trying the “pack the court” with justices who would simply be his yes men.
Reacting to his critics, Roosevelt cut to the heart of the matter:
“[I]f by that phrase the charge is made… that I will appoint Justices who will not undertake to override the judgment of the Congress on legislative policy, that I will appoint Justices who will act as Justices and not as legislators—if the appointment of such Justices can be called ‘packing the Courts,’ then I say that I and with me the vast majority of the American people favor doing just that thing—now.”
Congress never voted on the plan. It’s unclear whether it would have succeeded, or if a more moderate plan that would have given him only two or three justices might have passed more easily.
Instead, on March 29, 1937, a Washington state minimum-wage law came before the Supreme Court in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish. The law in question was nearly identical to the New York state law that had come before the court a year earlier when it had outlawed minimum-wage laws as being unconstitutional.
But this time, Justice Owen Roberts abandoned the Four Horsemen to uphold Washington’s minimum wage in a 5-4 decision. In a further series of 5-4 decisions two weeks later, the court upheld the National Labor Relations Act as constitutional.
The nation was astonished.
Less than two months later, the court declared that Social Security was constitutional.
The New Deal had been saved from execution on the Supreme Court’s bench by bending to Roosevelt’s threat. Social Security had been salvaged, and the National Labor Relations Act gave labor and unions a lifeline after generations of fighting to stay afloat.
Roberts’ about-face in the West Coast Hotel case was referred to at the time as “the switch in time that saved nine,” rendering FDR’s proposal unnecessary.
It’s time to play hardball.
Democrats have a short moment here to use historical precedent to reconfigure our government so it represents the will of a majority of Americans. Abortion can be re-legalized if Democrats in Congress choose to set aside the filibuster and either pass a law codifying Roe or, with a more long-term strategy, add new members to the the Court.
Or both.
PART OF THE HARTMANN REPORT GOT DELETED. That's how much somebody didn't want you to see it.
Pedo did you see how wrong you were on prohibition?
Pass a Law
The first strategy is for Congress to pass a law that puts the essence of Roe and Casey into law.
Exactly pederast rather than 9 people in black robes deciding it, a law should be passed
Wow the Constitution
Please do this .
😊
Pass a Law
The first strategy is for Congress to pass a law that puts the essence of Roe and Casey into law.🙃
Bidenomics
Natural gas (NG1:COM) prices crossed $8.00 per mmbtu Tuesday, putting the fuel on pace for its highest close since 2008."
Inflation turns systemic
Still waiting pederast
James can't Cali.
The idiot n chief.
"
Nope, he tried to think again on his own and was destroyed.
All he’s capable of copy & pasting, he’s simply dumb
"Biden warned that if Roe v. Wade is overturned, 'whole range of rights are in question"
Cali.
James & Roger are two stupid peas in the same Socialist pod.
James is concerned about the life of the baby in the womb.
Blogger KansasDemocrat said...
"Biden warned that if Roe v. Wade is overturned, 'whole range of rights are in question"
Simply and flatly false.
This is what you get when you order a president through the mail who finished near the bottom of his law school class.
RRB.
Yep. Joe lied.
How said this Crazy Joe or Roger.
I think I probably have a much higher IQ than you do."
Disinformation Chief
"I wanted to stay and went back to law school and in fact ended up in the top half of my class,″
No.joe you didnt
RRB.
Yep. Joe lied.
Perhaps, but don't chalk up to malice what can be attributed to sheer fucking stupidity.
And by the way, Roberts is not taking this seriously. Rather than get law enforcement involved to investigate the leak he's assigned it to the Marshal of the Supreme Court. A person with no real law enforcement power.
That leads me to believe that the little Indian shitstain leaked it at the direction of the nitwit Latinx.
It certainly would be a shame if that clerk was discovered at Fort Marcy Park full of multiple self-inflicted gunshot wounds.
As we said, all about Political Power and control, never about medical science
Newly released documents showed the CDC planned to use phone location data to monitor schools and churches, and wanted to use the data for many non-COVID-19 purposes too.
Until now, the left has been able to utterly destroy the integrity of virtually every institution in America save one - The USSC. And now they've gotten around that that one.
I called up one of the smartest professors I know at one of the top law schools in the country, and he echoed that: “To my knowledge, it’s never happened before in the modern history of the court. It is the most serious possible breach.”
Serious, severe, shocking, he said. But in the end, not surprising. Why not? Here’s how he put it: “To me, the leak is not surprising because many of the people we’ve been graduating from schools like Yale are the kind of people who would do such a thing.”
What did he mean by that? “They think that everything is violence. And so everything is permitted.”
He went on: “I’m sure this person sees themselves as a whistleblower. What they don’t understand is that, by leaking this, they violate the trust that is necessary to maintain the institution.”
https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-shocking-supreme-court-leak?t=&s=r
The Timing Was Intentional: Roe v Wade Leak Was Left’s Answer to “2000 Mules” Documentary Release Today that Proves 2020 Election Was Stolen
The movie proves through geotracking and video confirmation that Democrats used ballot trafficking to steal the election in a conspiracy that included every 2020 battleground state.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/05/timing-intentional-roe-v-wade-leak-lefts-answer-2000-mules-documentary-release-today-proves-2020-election-stolen/
definitely would explain the statistical abnormalities with this "election"
and why democrats don't want election integrity reform
they cheat
and obfuscate
btw has someone finally cancelled the "pastor"
looks like he's been completely canceled
Job well done !!!
maybe Elon bought out CHT
IrrationalEthiclistDisorder
The Real Halfbaked Soars Pundit said...
IrrationalEthiclistDisorder
Quoting Biden their roger?
or do you have a new medical condition?
and haven't been wearing your mask ?
* there
don't want to awaken the grammar nazi
in case Elon hasn't figured out how to automatically do that
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/05/timing-
Fuck you rat and the gate way pundit!!!!!!!! You dumb fucks obfuscating the decision to who fucking leaked the document......That person is a hero and assholes like you should go back and live in the middle ages where women were chattel and men were brave, unlike you and che chicken shit GOP are an abomination!!!!!!
I wonder whether the 70% who think Roe should remain will turn into votes????? If it does, you slurping dumb fucks will get the pasting you deserve, back to the dark ages of man kind!!!!! So much for small government, not you have government of the minority ruling of the lives of half the citizens who you don't care about!!!!
It will disappear soon after
US shaken to its core by supreme court draft that would overturn Roe v Wade
Biden condemns abortion opinion that, if handed down, would mean ‘fundamental shift’ in law and imperil many other rights
US politics – live coverage
David Smith and Lauren Gambino in Washington, Martin Pengelly and Oliver Milman in New York
Tue 3 May 2022 13.14 EDT
Joe Biden has warned that a leaked draft supreme court ruling overturning Roe v Wade, the 1973 case which guaranteed the right to abortion, would represent a huge change in America law and could imperil a wide range of other civil rights.
As the US supreme court moves to end abortion, is America still a free country?
Moira Donegan
Read more
In a historic moment that shook the US to the core and highlighted jagged social and political divisions, the court confirmed the draft was authentic but said it did not “represent a decision by the court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case”.
Advertisement
‘An abomination’: Pelosi leadsoutcry on supreme court draft abortion ruling
Biden said the ruling, if handed down, would represent a “fundamental shift in American jurisprudence” and could imperil rights including same-sex marriage and access to contraception.
Politico published the draft by justice Samuel Alito on Monday night. The website said the draft was supported by four other rightwingers on a panel conservatives control 6-3.
On Tuesday the chief justice, John Roberts, called its leak a “betrayal of the confidences of the court” which could “undermine the integrity of our operations” and promised an investigation.
Speaking to reporters, Biden said the draft ruling had ramifications for “all the decisions you make in your private life, who you marry, whether or not you decide to conceive a child, whether or not you can have an abortion and a range of other decisions [including] how you raise your child”.
02:52
'A radical decision': Biden condemns leaked US supreme court opinion on Roe v Wade – video
The draft ruling would allow states to declare abortion illegal.
Advertisement
It will disappear soon after
US shaken to its core by supreme court draft that would overturn Roe v Wade
Biden condemns abortion opinion that, if handed down, would mean ‘fundamental shift’ in law and imperil many other rights
US politics – live coverage
David Smith and Lauren Gambino in Washington, Martin Pengelly and Oliver Milman in New York
Tue 3 May 2022 13.14 EDT
Joe Biden has warned that a leaked draft supreme court ruling overturning Roe v Wade, the 1973 case which guaranteed the right to abortion, would represent a huge change in America law and could imperil a wide range of other civil rights.
As the US supreme court moves to end abortion, is America still a free country?
Moira Donegan
Read more
In a historic moment that shook the US to the core and highlighted jagged social and political divisions, the court confirmed the draft was authentic but said it did not “represent a decision by the court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case”.
Advertisement
‘An abomination’: Pelosi leadsoutcry on supreme court draft abortion ruling
Biden said the ruling, if handed down, would represent a “fundamental shift in American jurisprudence” and could imperil rights including same-sex marriage and access to contraception.
Politico published the draft by justice Samuel Alito on Monday night. The website said the draft was supported by four other rightwingers on a panel conservatives control 6-3.
On Tuesday the chief justice, John Roberts, called its leak a “betrayal of the confidences of the court” which could “undermine the integrity of our operations” and promised an investigation.
Speaking to reporters, Biden said the draft ruling had ramifications for “all the decisions you make in your private life, who you marry, whether or not you decide to conceive a child, whether or not you can have an abortion and a range of other decisions [including] how you raise your child”.
02:52
'A radical decision': Biden condemns leaked US supreme court opinion on Roe v Wade – video
The draft ruling would allow states to declare abortion illegal.
California will see Abortion Tourism boom , bringing much needed tax dollars .
Draft ruling allows Abortion to be performed in States that want it.
Alky is be vewy, vewy cwever
He 1st post under Alky nym and then anonymous so no one will know it’s him
LMAO
Draft ruling BWAAAAAAPAAAAAA!!!!!
One of the great features of my Georgia cabin is we are located in a low level AF flight zone.....get to see and HEAR many types of aircraft practicing low level flight!!! Just had a flight of 2 F-16' on directly over the house and the other just south at about 500 feet AGL in full burner heading south west....Wife was trying to take a nap which was ruined by the noise!!!! Me, great seeing the freedom our military provides all citizens, even trump slurping assholes trying to maintain power over women!!!!!!
Roger is transparently stupid.
May 7th, 2022 was to be the day he married again.
It has been cancelled.
The voiding of Roe.
Is the left still saying abortion should be:
"Safe, legal and rare"?
May 3 (Reuters) - The leak of a U.S. Supreme Court draft opinion that would overturn the constitutional right to abortion is a major breach of confidentiality that has heightened the stakes in an already politically-charged case, experts say.
Politico on Monday night published a draft majority opinion that it had obtained striking down the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which guaranteed the right to abortion nationwide. It was a sign that the court's 6-3 conservative majority was ready to flex its muscle.
I'd go as far as saying killing goat fuckers should be an open season!!!!
Biden said the ruling, if handed down,
Actually, Dementia Joe said, ‘We uh..have to uhh..protect the thing”
LOL
It undetermined the trust in our system
No such ruling occurred Roger.
Please become informed.
Then post.
Blogger The Real Halfbaked Soars Pundit said...
It undetermined the trust in our system
O’Tay
Wednesday May 4th, 2022
Federal Reserve Chairman Powell will up rated 50 basis points.
Roger, you missed two ID changes yesterday and one today.
Be more careful.
Yes goat fucker....glad you are the last one to find that out!!!! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
O'Tay buckwheat.......LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Fuck you rat and the gate way pundit!!!!!!!!
OK BWAA, if you say so. But I didn't post the GP link.
Actually, Dementia Joe said, ‘We uh..have to uhh..protect the thing”
BWAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!SO FUCKING WHAT SHORTY!!!!!!!!!!
Blogger The Real Halfbaked Soars Pundit said...
IrrationalEthiclistDisorder
New diagnosis from the Cuckoo's Nest shrink, alky?
Never heard of "Ethiclist."
Sounds serious, perhaps terminal.
Inflation is now systemic.
Exactly what Bidenomics was attempting to avoid.
The joy of Biden's new world order.
Never heard of "Ethicist."
BWAAAAAAAQQQQ So fucking what.....you've never seen proof of massive voter fraud also but you think that is real!!!!
Democrats and their affiliated outside groups have raised more than $5 million since a report first unveiled a leaked draft Supreme Court opinion that would overturn the historic Roe v. Wade ruling and allow states to restrict abortions.
The donation website ActBlue, which allows donors to contribute online to Democratic campaigns, political action committees and outside groups that often support the the party's policy goals, processed the gargantuan sum since Politico published the draft opinion Monday. CNBC calculated the amount by watching the site's live ticker since Tuesday morning and combining it with data made public through Twitter posts by Andrew Arenge, a director of operations at the Penn Program on Opinion Research and Election Studies.
Arenge tweeted out early Tuesday that "since about 9:40 PM last night (about an hour after Politico published their SCOTUS piece), Act Blue processed about $2.2M donations through their platform." Arenge has tracked the fundraising totals since the original Politico story was published, he said in previous Twitter posts.
NARAL Pro-Choice America, a nonprofit that lobbies and advocates against abortion restrictions, uses ActBlue to raise money. The group, along with fellow pro-abortion rights groups Planned Parenthood Action Fund and Emily's List, recently announced a $150 million combined investment into the 2022 midterm elections.
Democrats are highlighting threats to abortion rights to raise money and boost voter enthusiasm ahead of the pivotal 2022 midterm elections. The party risks losing its slight majorities in both the House and Senate, and since Politico published its story, Democratic leaders have called to elect more members of Congress who will vote to protect abortion rights.
Never heard of "Ethicist."
SO FUCKING WHAT.....You have never seen proof of massive voter fraud also.......but know it is true.....BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!
Thanks alky FYI. Or is it FYI alky?
A fool and his money are soon parted.
Biden is lying...
The Roe v Wade decision was carved out very specifically for abortion. In fact the exact same logic (privacy) has been rejected time and time again for other similar types of situations.
Heck... there is no Federal privacy to smoke a joint in your own home.
But a constitutional right to "medical" privacy for a procedure that is technically not really all that medical.
Blogger C.H. Truth said...
Biden is lying...
The Roe v Wade decision was carved out very specifically for abortion. In fact the exact same logic (privacy) has been rejected time and time again for other similar types of situations.
Precisely.
And it's hardly "settled law" because the USSC doesn't pass law. That's the duty of the legislature.
Roe has been an constitutional abomination since it's inception, and the Burger Court contortions used to create it out of thin air reveal just how corrupt the Burger Court really was.
Hey alky, would you like to revisit your "losing the popular vote" meme?
A blue check just floated that on Twitter and got fucking SCHOOLED...
https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2022/05/03/class-is-in-session-julia-ioffe-schooled-for-trying-to-blame-electoral-college-for-leaked-scotus-draft-overturning-roe/
RIP the 'pregnant man' emoji.
We barely knew ya.
*sniff*
*sob*
ng...
The Roe v Wade decision was carved out very specifically for abortion. In fact the exact same logic (privacy) has been rejected time and time again for other similar types of situations.
Really Lil Schitty??????? Your opinion is again just PURE BS!!!!!! Sad the biggest liar is you!!!!!! Maybe you should put a camera in your room while you are fucking your child bride.....and tell us about privacy!!!!! BTW.....your ignorance is only exceeded by your white power mantra
In-clinic abortion works by using suction to take a pregnancy out of your uterus. There are a couple of kinds of in-clinic abortion procedures. Your doctor or nurse will know which type is right for you, depending on how far you are into your pregnancy.
Maybe you can explain when your that a colonoscopy is not technically medical........asshole!!!!
Hey rat......More than absurd Ioffe made that connection.....even more absurd is a dumb fuck like you thinking trump won without proof......or the millions of popular vote in both elections........minortity rule will soon be a thing of the past as the country may wake up to your stupid games/////
And it's hardly "settled law" because the USSC doesn't pass law
It is precedent asshole that both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh said in their hearings was final!!!! IOW's both those fucking cowards lied to congress and were confirmed
Roe “is a precedent of the United States Supreme Court,” Gorsuch told Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley.
Gorsuch had the same refrain on precedent when pressed on several other hot-button issues, including guns and campaign finance.
Gorsuch therefor does not believe precedent means anything to women rights!!!!!
Well Denny...
Doctors perform "cosmetic" surgery that is only "medical" in that a doctor performs it. It is not a necessary medical procedure.
There are a few examples where an abortion can be performed for a medical purpose (life of the mother). But sucking another living being out of another body isn't really a necessary medical procedure that has anything to do with the health of the mother... unless you consider the entire concept of pregnancy to be a disease or ailment?
Standing in front of the US supreme court, congressman Don Beyer of Virginia waits for his turn to speak in front of a growing crowd of protestors, some holding purple signs reading “hands off our bodies”.
“We’ve been seeing this coming for quite a while but it’s really devastating when it actually comes. It’s so full of holes. If this is set aside what else can be set aside?” the Democrat told the Guardian.
“There’s so many mixed marriages, interracial marriages right now, are they all going to be illegal?”
Beyer, in a tweet earlier today, said the abortion fight was “on the doorstep” of Virginia, where Republican governor Glenn Youngkin favors restrictions.
Abortion is still legal and will remain a constitutionally protected right under Roe v. Wade until the Supreme Court officially rules otherwise.
But if they do, Virginia's Governor wants to ban abortion and our General Assembly is narrowly divided. This fight is on our doorstep. https://t.co/TJsnj8bViD
— Rep. Don Beyer (@RepDonBeyer) May 3, 2022\n","url":"https://twitter.com/RepDonBeyer/status/1521531252494508034","id":"1521531252494508034","hasMedia":false,"role":"inline","isThirdPartyTracking":false,"source":"Twitter","elementId":"901103d9-19a9-485c-a13f-b330ee6582a6"}}" data-gu-ready="true" style="box-sizing: border-box;">
Meanwhile, Democratic senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts addressed the crowd to call for the expansion of the number of justices on the supreme court, according to the New York Times.
The crowd broke into a chant of “four more seats!”, the number of new liberal justices that would need to be confirmed to overturn the current 6-3 conservative majority.
A presidential commission to look into the supreme court, including its make-up, was appointed by Joe Biden last year, but according to Politico fizzled out with no recommendation.
Biden, however, is believed to be against so-called court packing.
Don’t forget a year ago SCOTUS struck down a law requiring the abortion doc to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital
Some medical procedure
It is precedent asshole that both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh said in their hearings was final!!!!
wrong.
They declared it was stare decisis which means it it exists as a matter of precedent, the Burger Court's ruling, but that doesn't mean it's immune or exempt from challenge.
An added bonus of the whole thing is that it makes every woman in America an instant 'Biologist' as they scream and shriek to protect a "woman's" right to choose.
IOW's it's a slap to the clown that Sloppy Joe nominated for the USSC.
LOL
Anonymous Caliphate4vr said...
Don’t forget a year ago SCOTUS struck down a law requiring the abortion doc to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital
Some medical procedure
Veterinary clinics are more sanitary than most abortion clinics.
When you really sit down and unpack the abortion issue, which a devout leftist will never do, the amount of sheer hypocrisy surrounding the issue can be measured in the millions of tons.
-wrong.
They declared it was stare decisis which means it it exists as a matter of precedent,
BWAAAAAAAAA!!!!! That is not what they said to congress!!!!!!! Fucking liar just like those 2 assholes!!!!! When was the las time you got laid by a screaming biologist let alone a women.......BWAAAAAAAAAA!!
Anonymous FYI said...
Standing in front of the US supreme court, congressman Don Beyer of Virginia waits for his turn to speak in front of a growing crowd of protestors, some holding purple signs reading “hands off our bodies”.
And these same clowns insisted upon vax and mask mandates, which require government hands ON our bodies.
Thanks for the reminder, FYI alky.
Denny...
You seem awful upset?
Are you worried about getting pregnant and having to carry that baby to term... you know, as a birthing parent who according to liberals can be a man?
For the lying fraud asshole rat.....what Kavanaugh said at his hearing is nothing like what you wished he said......
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/05/kavanaugh-abortion-confirmation-questions-770285
Sorry sport your grasp or reality is tempered by your extreme bias and lack of facts....just like trump won!!!!!
You seem awful upset?
And you seem to be more ignorant than ever, asshole.......You are the one who is forcing women to live the way YOU want....not me....I imagine you would be thrilled to knock up your child and become a daddy at 55 years old......BWAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! Good for you.....LOLOLOLOL Your claim about a birthing man is just another example of the GOP worm who ate you fucking brain!!!!!
Live free and prosper and leave others to their own devices......not life in your fantasy white world......
Well Denny...
Did you read your Politico Story?
Brett Kavanaugh, facing his first day of questioning from the Senate Judiciary Committee, stressed he respects Supreme Court precedent and understands the importance of Roe. But he parried a series of questions about his views toward abortion, or even on that case.
Kavanaugh, a conservative who would tip the balance of the court to the right, fell back on the same assurances offered by past high court nominees that he would respect prior decisions that enshrined abortion as a constitutional right.
He allowed that precedent is only one factor that goes into deciding a case, albeit a “critically important” one.
Boy Denny... that doesn't sound like a promise to not overturn Roe?
In fact, it sounds a great deal like what Rat said... that he understands and respects the precedent and stares decisis - but that precedent is only "one" factor...
You are the one who is forcing women to live the way YOU want..
How am "I" doing anything Denny?
I am pro-choice and always have been. If given a straight vote on the subject I would vote to keep it legal and my opinions would be in line with a majority of Americans.
To me... this is about the role of our courts and whether or not we should continue to allow certain "political" issues be decided by these courts. The Roe decision was never well founded and was/will eventually overturned for the reasons that it is a legal aberration.
It should be something that is decided by those who are representative of the people. If our Federal politicians do not have the votes to codify abortion into law, then the constitution provides for the States to regulate that.
You want to do something.. then move to Texas and vote Democrat!
Blogger C.H. Truth said...
Denny...
You seem awful upset?
Are you worried about getting pregnant and having to carry that baby to term... you know, as a birthing parent who according to liberals can be a man?
The 'pregnant man' emoji was created specifically for BWAA. Whether he manages to get himself knocked up, or he's just making his 19th lap around the buffet line at the Golden Corral, it applies.
How am "I" doing anything Denny?
If I have to explain that to you, you are dumber than the goat fucking asshole!!!!!!!!! If you pro choice you have a funny way of showing it. The court is now being activist to the extreme and you support that travesty.....there is no business that the court or govmt should have any bearing in any womens right to choose....Your opinion about founding is just that....sad and pathetic....no matter what you argue....the fundamental right for a women to live as she wishes was confirmed in Roe and therefor a good decision in spite of your bias of not liking it..BWAAAAAAAAAA!!!......asshole
What is more germane to my disgust with the SCOTUS....is the way Gorsuch and Kavanaugh danced and lied around the issue of abortion and as far as I am concerned both lied about their feelings on precedents......Susan Collins is on record that they would not overturn Roe.......again confirming the GOP is nothing but the biggest group of liars and power hungry white folk that want to maintain power any way they can.....
Lock up her or him
During an appearance on Fox Business, Cruz blamed the leak on "some angry left-wing law clerk."
The Texas senator worried that the impact of the leak "will carry on perhaps forever, limiting the ability of the court."
"The reason it was leaked is some, presumably, left-wing law clerk wanted to put political pressure on the five justices that are presumably in the majority right now," he added. "You mentioned an FBI investigation. I hope there is a serious one and I hope whoever is responsible, not only is fired instantly, but is prosecuted and serves real jailtime for violating the confidences of the Supreme Court."
Yes asshole, I read the piece!!!
ve who would tip the balance of the court to the right, fell back on the same assurances offered by past high court nominees that he would RESPECT prior decisions that enshrined abortion as a constitutional right.
IOW'S He lied like you Lil Schitty by showing NO RESPECT FOR THE DECISIONS as Susan Collins has pointed out.....I bet you think this is a great campaign point for turning the senate and congress as 70% think roe should be sustained..... Sorry sport, you and the GOP are the scum of the earth!!!!
"You mentioned an FBI investigation. I hope there is a serious one and I hope whoever is responsible, not only is fired instantly, but is prosecuted and serves real jailtime for violating the confidences of the Supreme Court."
The FBI is not involved. Not that it would matter if they were. No Federal Agency in the history of the republic has less credibility.
Chief Coward Roberts called upon the "Marshal of the Court."
The Marshal handles security for the court. It also serves papers and disburses some funds.
(a) The Supreme Court may appoint a marshal, who shall be subject to removal by the Court, and may fix his compensation.
(b) The marshal may, with the approval of the Chief Justice of the United States, appoint and fix the compensation of necessary assistants and other employees to attend the Court, and necessary custodial employees.
(c) The marshal shall:
(1) Attend the Court at its sessions;
(2) Serve and execute all process and orders issued by the Court or a member thereof;
(3) Take charge of all property of the United States used by the Court or its members;
(4) Disburse funds appropriated for work upon the Supreme Court building and grounds under the jurisdiction of the Architect of the Capitol upon certified vouchers submitted by the Architect;
(5) Disburse funds appropriated for the purchase of books, pamphlets, periodicals and other publications, and for their repair, binding, and rebinding, upon vouchers certified by the librarian of the Court;
(6) Pay the salaries of the Chief Justice, associate justices, and all officers and employees of the Court and disburse other funds appropriated for disbursement, under the direction of the Chief Justice;
(7) Pay the expenses of printing briefs and travel expenses of attorneys in behalf of persons whose motions to appear in forma pauperis in the Supreme Court have been approved and when counsel have been appointed by the Supreme Court, upon vouchers certified by the clerk of the Court;
(8) Oversee the Supreme Court Police.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshal_of_the_United_States_Supreme_Court
h/t: AoS
I don't see "investigate crimes" on there. I don't see "subpoena witnesses' phone and email records" on there.
So if you're scratching your head trying to remember what big crimes the Marshal of the Supreme Court cracked, the answer is none. None big crimes.
Which is as Roberts wants it.
Note Well: I do not have to believe in the FBI to also know that Roberts believes in the FBI, nor to know that Roberts avoided calling the FBI for entirely different reasons than commenters would have for avoiding calling the FBI.
Those of you saying "Well the FBI is corrupt anyway" -- yeah, Roberts obviously disagrees. He is not avoiding the FBI for that reason. He is avoiding the FBI so that he can avoid an investigation entirely.
What the Marshal of the Supreme Court does, primarily, is provide security, and right now, the leaker has put five people on the list for would-be assassins. Not a single person in the Marshal's staff should be doing anything except providing security and investigating threats to the lives of the five conservative justices.
And yes of course, the Secret Service should be bringing in all sorts of resources and bodies too.
So yes, the FBI should be handling the leak investigation.
https://ace.mu.nu/archives/398961.php
If you pro choice you have a funny way of showing it.
BWAA, this is why I consider leftists to be hysterical whack jobs.
Pro-choice or pro-life is really irrelevant to this ruling.
What's at issue here is how Roe was originally decided and codified, the contortions required to get there, and the fact that this ultimately results in the issue being returned to the states.
This link displays a map that indicates where you can get an abortion and where you cannot:
https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Supreme-Court-strikes-Roe-v-Wade-states-affected-17144487.php?IPID=Times-Union-HP-CP-spotlight
So return it to the states as the 10th amendment clearly states, and if you find yourself knocked up in a banned or restricted state, fill up with a tankful of Sloppy Joe's $7/gallon gas and hit the fucking road.
Problem solved.
Trump Appointments and Sen Mitch McConnell are winning the day in the USSC.
Derek Hunter
https://twitter.com/derekahunter/status/1521454525625901062
Since whoever gave @politico this document didn't have the right or authority to do it, doesn't that make it a hacked or stolen document? Doesn't @Twitter have a rule against highlighting or promoting those types of documents? Shouldn't this story get the NY Post treatment?
guess the "Hunter" rule was not really a rule
odd
If I have to explain that to you, you are dumber than the goat fucking asshole!!!!!!!!! If you pro choice you have a funny way of showing it. The court is now being activist to the extreme and you support that travesty...
You cannot explain it because you apparently do not understand it.
Abortion is not a constitutional right and there is no law to protect it. The only thing protecting abortion for decades has been a court ruling. Probably the more criticized court ruling in history of our courts. It literally created a right out of thin air.
You live by the courts... then you die by the courts. A court ruling can always be overturned and if it has the amount of holes that Roe has, it is a surprise that it is still standing for this long.
So it is not "activism" when a court makes a decision that counters another court decision. It is exactly what courts do. In this case, the USSC "leaked" draft ruling would simply take the court out of it and leave it to the legislation (which is where it always should have been).
If you understood it... then I wouldn't need to explain it to you.
The Prime Minister of Great Britain is having his historical success
Boris Johnson has told the Ukrainian parliament that there should never be a peace settlement imposed against the will of the Ukrainian people, calling the fight to hold back Russian forces “Ukraine’s finest hour”.
The address came after a scramble by No 10 to prevent the timings of the assembly being released – after they were sent by Downing Street to journalists in a press release and then retracted.
A source said there had been urgent requests by the Ukrainians to prevent the timings being released, in order to protect the security around President Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s movements.
Speaking as the first western leader to address members of the Verkhovna Rada since the start of the conflict, Johnson said: “It is precisely because of your valour, your courage, your sacrifice, that Ukrainians now control your own destiny.
“You are the masters of your fate, and no one can or should impose anything on Ukrainians. We in the UK will be guided by you and we are proud to be your friends.”
As members of the Rada waved union jack banners, Johnson said he had “one message for you today: Ukraine will win, Ukraine will be free”.
Johnson said the west should not put pressure on Ukraine for any settlement that involved relinquishing territory. “No outsider like me can speak lightly about how the conflict could be settled if only Ukraine would relinquish this or that piece or territory or we find some compromise for Vladimir Putin.
“We know what happens to the people left in the clutches of this invader. And we who are your friends must be humble about what happened in 2014, because Ukraine was invaded before for the first time, when Crimea was taken from Ukraine and the war in Donbas began.
Winston Churchill is cheering from heaven
The truth is that we were too slow to grasp what was really happening and we collectively failed to impose the sanctions then that we should have put on Vladimir Putin. We cannot make the same mistake again.”
Johnson said the UK would make a long-term commitment to Ukraine’s security: “We will carry on supplying Ukraine, alongside your other friends, with weapons, funding and humanitarian aid, until we have achieved our long-term goal, which must be so to fortify Ukraine that no one will ever dare to attack you again.”
Ahead of the speech, Johnson announced a £300m package of military aid including electronic warfare equipment, a counter-battery radar system, GPS jamming equipment and thousands of night vision devices.
Volodymyr Zelenskiy and members of the Verkhovna Rada stand for Ukraine’s national anthem before the address by Boris Johnson. Photograph: Verkhovna Rada/PA
Johnson addressed the parliament after being introduced by its speaker. Zelenskiy said the UK and Ukraine were now “brothers and sisters” because of the UK’s friendship and support.
The UK prime minister said Russian soldiers “no longer have the excuse of not knowing what they are doing” and said those troops who remained “are committing war crimes, and their atrocities emerge wherever they are forced to retreat – as we’ve seen at Bucha, at Irpin at Hostomel and many other places”.
Johnson said he had refused to believe military advice that Ukraine’s army would fall within days of a Russian invasion. He said the intelligence he had received that Putin was planning an invasion had given him “a sense of horror but also of puzzlement”.
UK inquiry ‘to establish whether British components used in Russian weapons’
He said: “There were some who believed the Kremlin propaganda that Russian armour would be like an irresistible force going like a knife through butter, and that Kyiv would fall within days.
“Do you remember they said that? And people rang Volodymyr and offered him safe passage out of the country, and he said ‘No thanks’.”
Johnson paid tribute to Ukraine’s armed forces, which he said were outnumbered three to one. “They fought with the energy and courage of lions.
“You have exploded the myth of Putin’s invincibility and you have written one of the most glorious chapters in military history and in the life of your country. The so-called irresistible force of Putin’s war machine has broken on the immoveable object of Ukrainian patriotism and love of country.
“This is Ukraine’s finest hour, that will be remembered and recounted for generations to come.”
The conservative Prime Minister of Great Britain 🇬🇧 disagreed with Scott
Democrats GREATLY ENERGIZED After Leaked Abortion Decision
May 3, 2022 at 6:08 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard 512 Comments
“Not yet 24 hours after the publication of a leaked Supreme Court draft opinion that would overturn constitutional protections of abortion rights,
Democrats at every level across the country were capitalizing on a potentially SEISMIC SHIFT shift in the political landscape THAT COULD UPEND what was to be a bloodbath of a midterm election for an otherwise disillusioned party,”
NBC News reports.
“Attacks on Republican candidates are underway,
as are a flurry of pleas for donations.
Ads defending abortion rights
are rapidly populating social media.
The Democratic National Committee launched a text messaging campaign
to move people to the streets,
while some of the most powerful Democratic groups in the nation
were huddling to reshape their messaging.”
Associated Press:
Sudden abortion focus shakes midterm election landscape.
AND MEANWHILE
GO UKRAINE!!!!!
(6:11, 6:13, 6:32)
If SCOTUS Can Overturn Roe, It Can Ban Interracial Marriage
Oh look Pedo, ran from the other thread when his stupidity had a light shown upon it
Reminds me….
LOL
Post a Comment