Abortion under attack again?

[Sunburn74]

SCOTUS taking up the mississippi ban at 15 weeks despite the federal appeals courts shutting it down. Seems to suggest they will let it go through. Otherwise they'd have just ignored it and let the rulings stand. No reason to take up a case unless federal courts are divided and the courts are certainly not divided...

Texas just signed a ban at 6 weeks today!

Chickens coming home to roost for those women who chose not to vote for hillary when they had the chance.

 

[Brainonska511]

Chickens coming home to roost for those women who chose not to vote for hillary when they had the chance.

Something something can't threaten people with the supreme court, both sides...

To provide some serious commentary:
It seems like we're just returning to the historic partisanship of some institutions of the country - a very conservative supreme court and very partisan congresses.

 

[zinfamous]

This is just one of those primary issues where conservatives suddenly forget about "activist judges" and legislating from the bench when it comes to states and their purposefully unconstitutional, absurd, bullshit laws that are explicitly passed as a goal to challenge supreme court precedence and actual law.

Just ignore them whenever they open their yaps about this stuff. They are the most fundamentally dishonest assholes on the planet.

 

[Fenixgoon]

given what the court did with the voting rights act, I won't be shocked if this SCOTUS upholds the law and says "congress needs to provide clearer laws"

 

[HomerJS]

Pro life people on the end all abortions bandwagon yet these same people will not put on masks to protect others from catching a deadly disease and dying.

 

[HomerJS]

SCOTUS taking up the mississippi ban at 15 weeks despite the federal appeals courts shutting it down. Seems to suggest they will let it go through. Otherwise they'd have just ignored it and let the rulings stand. No reason to take up a case unless federal courts are divided and the courts are certainly not divided...

Texas just signed a ban at 6 weeks today!

Chickens coming home to roost for those women who chose not to vote for hillary when they had the chance.

Not only did Texas sign a ridiculous 6 week ban they attempted to wipe their hands of prosecuting by stating people outside the state could bring action against doctors and women.

 

[Commodus]

I wouldn't presume SCOTUS is taking this up to let the ban stay. While conservatives clearly rigged the court in hopes of overturning Roe v. Wade and otherwise setting the agenda, the actual decisions that have come down haven't panned out quite like they hoped.

As it stands, if you want to be cynical about it... I think this SCOTUS realizes that fulfilling the GOP's anti-woman fantasies could backfire not just in elections, but for the court demographics. Endorsing anti-choice legislation gives Democrats a stronger incentive to pack the court.

 

[Sunburn74]

I wouldn't presume SCOTUS is taking this up to let the ban stay. While conservatives clearly rigged the court in hopes of overturning Roe v. Wade and otherwise setting the agenda, the actual decisions that have come down haven't panned out quite like they hoped.

As it stands, if you want to be cynical about it... I think this SCOTUS realizes that fulfilling the GOP's anti-woman fantasies could backfire not just in elections, but for the court demographics. Endorsing anti-choice legislation gives Democrats a stronger incentive to pack the court.

I mean if they wanted to avoid a backlash the simple thing to do is just let the rulings stand. The precedence is quite clear.

They are taking it up to either
1) put the absolute kibosh on these laws that are coming out of these red states by writing a decision that is so strongly worded that is stops all shenanigans for 50 years
2) to significantly weaken Roe V Wade and curtail limitations in keeping with the viewpoints of the conservative right. For example they may remove the viability precedence and then that basically opens up the Pandoras box for how early is acceptable. Or they may set the limit at 15 weeks arbitrarily or something like that.

I think it's the latter particularly since they talked and voted on this case some 11 times (unusually high for a case the court is trying to decide on) before finally taking it up, suggestive that there is a real appetite to overrule the lower court. I think basically Roberts is trying to tell these guys that taking it up would shred the credibility of the court and the conservative members are like "YOLO".

 

[Fanatical Meat]

At this point I am tired of all the damage this subject does, I saw fine if the court & shithole States want to ban it, jail mothers, doctors and health workers, remove birth control from insurance and determine what is a problem pregnancy or what a “real” rape is.
I say fine let them do it and let’s see how voters react.
I am done bickering over this. I am sick of the poorly thought out dumb positions.

 

[Sunburn74]

At this point I am tired of all the damage this subject does, I saw fine if the court & shithole States want to ban it, jail mothers, doctors and health workers, remove birth control from insurance and determine what is a problem pregnancy or what a “real” rape is.
I say fine let them do it and let’s see how voters react.
I am done bickering over this. I am sick of the poorly thought out dumb positions.

You realize that it doesn't stop with states. I mean if the SCOTUS lets the states do complete bans, a federal ban would be next because Texas can't sleep well at night because their people are going to NM or California for abortions or whatever. As soon as states are allowed to do individual complete bans, next is a narrowly passed federal ban when the GOP has power, particularly if the filibuster is gutted.

Ultimately what you'd see is a back and forth on whether abortion is legal or not based on who's controlling congress and its ridiculous. Some years its legal and some years the GOP wipes it away. Just like the back and forth you see now with taxes.

 

[MtnMan]

The only time republicans, and evangelicals care about human life is before birth. After that, fuck you, you're on your own.

 

[HomerJS]

I wouldn't presume SCOTUS is taking this up to let the ban stay. While conservatives clearly rigged the court in hopes of overturning Roe v. Wade and otherwise setting the agenda, the actual decisions that have come down haven't panned out quite like they hoped.

As it stands, if you want to be cynical about it... I think this SCOTUS realizes that fulfilling the GOP's anti-woman fantasies could backfire not just in elections, but for the court demographics. Endorsing anti-choice legislation gives Democrats a stronger incentive to pack the court.

You mean conservative judges are not deciding on the Constitution and the merits of the case?

Wait a second

 

[MtnMan]

The only time republicans, and evangelicals care about human life is before birth. After that, fuck you, you're on your own.

I actually need to correct myself, republicans care about human life twice. Before they are born, and when their net worth reaches at least $100,000,000.00.

 

[cytg111]

The only time republicans, and evangelicals care about human life is before birth. After that, fuck you, you're on your own.

View attachment 44615

Isnt that an episode of The Handmaids Tale?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

You realize that it doesn't stop with states. I mean if the SCOTUS lets the states do complete bans, a federal ban would be next because Texas can't sleep well at night because their people are going to NM or California for abortions or whatever. As soon as states are allowed to do individual complete bans, next is a narrowly passed federal ban when the GOP has power, particularly if the filibuster is gutted.

Ultimately what you'd see is a back and forth on whether abortion is legal or not based on who's controlling congress and its ridiculous. Some years its legal and some years the GOP wipes it away. Just like the back and forth you see now with taxes.

Sure, let a country wide ban happen and let’s wait to see white girls being put in jail because they are pregnant and caught seeking an abortion. Let’s see how well that goes over, jail a few Doctors & Nurses too.
Again just appears to be a lost cause and major distraction to getting stuff done.

 

[BoomerD]

You folks realize, the fundies will NEVER stop trying to ban abortion...right?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

You folks realize, the fundies will NEVER stop trying to ban abortion...right?

That’s why I say fine ban it and explain why the ban is a good thing to non fundamentalists. Then watch what happens when elections roll around.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Sure, let a country wide ban happen and let’s wait to see white girls being put in jail because they are pregnant and caught seeking an abortion. Let’s see how well that goes over, jail a few Doctors & Nurses too.
Again just appears to be a lost cause and major distraction to getting stuff done.

I would bet such a ban will have a disproportionate effect due to income inequality. Those with sufficient resources will still find a way.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I would bet such a ban will have a disproportionate effect due to income inequality. Those with sufficient resources will still find a way.

I agree and that will only anger people more.

 

[KMFJD]

Ya'll see this?

Citizens, Not the State, Will Enforce New Abortion Law in Texas (Published 2021)

The measure bans abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy. And it effectively deputizes ordinary citizens to sue people involved in the process.

www.nytimes.com

Ordinarily, enforcement would be up to government officials, and if clinics wanted to challenge the law’s constitutionality, they would sue those officials in making their case. But the law in Texas prohibits officials from enforcing it. Instead, it takes the opposite approach, effectively deputizing ordinary citizens — including from outside Texas — to sue clinics and others who violate the law. It awards them at least $10,000 per illegal abortion if they are successful.
“It’s completely inverting the legal system,” said Stephen Vladeck, a constitutional law professor at the University of Texas at Austin. “It says the state is not going to be the one to enforce this law. Your neighbors are.”
The result is a law that is extremely difficult to challenge before it takes effect on Sept. 1, because it is hard to know whom to sue to block it, and lawyers for clinics are now wrestling with what to do about it. Six-week bans in other states have all been blocked as they make their way through the court system.

 

[solidsnake1298]

And this is why I will continue to live in a state that doesn't restrict my wife and daughter's bodily autonomy.

 

[nakedfrog]

Awful lot of fuss over what's supposedly "settled law", doncha think?

 

[darkswordsman17]

I wouldn't presume SCOTUS is taking this up to let the ban stay. While conservatives clearly rigged the court in hopes of overturning Roe v. Wade and otherwise setting the agenda, the actual decisions that have come down haven't panned out quite like they hoped.

As it stands, if you want to be cynical about it... I think this SCOTUS realizes that fulfilling the GOP's anti-woman fantasies could backfire not just in elections, but for the court demographics. Endorsing anti-choice legislation gives Democrats a stronger incentive to pack the court.

I don't agree at all. One of the sitting Supreme Court Justice's wife helped setup the Insurrection, and all 3 of the recent additions are anti-abortion to the point that was likely the singular reason they were chosen. I expect they'll do something to basically say "abortion is still legal" but allow states to effectively keep whittling it down further. They want to effectively ban abortion without actually doing it.

I think this was also one of the goals of Republicans getting a super majority on the court. Imagine if they restrict abortion while Democrats are President and they supposedly have control of Congress. Then Republicans can run attack ads saying how Biden restricted abortion rights. Obviously, we know who actually did, but for the morons that need to argue about how Democrats are the actual evil for liberals, it allows them the "gotcha". They go " doesn't matter if its Republican or Democrat, we'll keep taking your abortion rights away, so you might as well vote on other issues then." Don't be surprised if they run ads going "since you can't get an abortion, better make sure you don't get raped, the Dems love rapists and taking away your protection [guns]"

This is just one of those primary issues where conservatives suddenly forget about "activist judges" and legislating from the bench when it comes to states and their purposefully unconstitutional, absurd, bullshit laws that are explicitly passed as a goal to challenge supreme court precedence and actual law.

Just ignore them whenever they open their yaps about this stuff. They are the most fundamentally dishonest assholes on the planet.

Just one of? They never give a shit about that at all when its their side doing it. They feel justified because they consider giving human rights to everyone to be an affront to their inherently racist/bigoted worldview, and so to them Democrats are the ones actually doing that.

 

[MichaelMay]

SCOTUS taking up the mississippi ban at 15 weeks despite the federal appeals courts shutting it down. Seems to suggest they will let it go through. Otherwise they'd have just ignored it and let the rulings stand. No reason to take up a case unless federal courts are divided and the courts are certainly not divided...

Texas just signed a ban at 6 weeks today!

Chickens coming home to roost for those women who chose not to vote for hillary when they had the chance.

It's why the new judges were selected, after all. It was stated outright and if anyone missed it they were probably barefoot in the kitchen without a radio.

 

[ivwshane]

If a law gives a citizen a right to sue, can that law be upheld even if there is no standing for the suing citizen (or do I not standing correctly?)

For instance. If congress creates a law that says ordinary citizens may sue gun sellers and gun manufacturers for any gun used in a crime, would that work?

Let’s go a step further; let’s say the law bans all guns but it isn’t to be enforced by any government but it allows individual citizens to sue gun owners, manufactures, and resellers, would that be just as valid as this abortion law?