News Roe v. Wade overturned

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,063
1,464
126
If abortion is banned without exception in TX (as is likely) and she would die without one then she would die. We're re-entering an era where crossing state lines will have increasingly large impacts on what a person's freedoms are to an extent not seen in decades.
And even if there is a "health of the mother" exception in states like Texas (unlikely as they have shown time and again they care nothing about the health of their residents), what's the cut off line? Lets say a pregnant woman has a complication that increases the chance of her dying but isn't guaranteed it will kill her. Is there a percentage chance that's the cut off? Would a woman who is 70% chance likely to die be allowed to abort but a 25% chance isn't? If the 25% chance woman has a fetus that is wholly unviable allowed or not allowed? What's the cutoff of viability of the fetus vs survival percentage of the pregnant woman? I have a friend who had to get what would have been her second child aborted due to hemorrhaging and almost couldn't get a doctor to do it because of restrictive abortion laws in my state so this stuff is on my mind a lot
 

z1ggy

Lifer
May 17, 2008
10,004
63
91
If abortion is banned without exception in TX (as is likely) and she would die without one then she would die. We're re-entering an era where crossing state lines will have increasingly large impacts on what a person's freedoms are to an extent not seen in decades.
Can the ruling be overturned if Alito and Thomas happen to retire/die while a Liberal is in office?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,326
6,037
126
All the blaming of Democrats just reminds us of Murc's Law: only Democrats have agency. Let's not think of holding the people actually responsible accountable for their actions (ie, Republicans and their supporters).
Surely if we are going to blame people it should be the guilty. Why couldn’t that be both?

But if all of us are asleep acting out a deeply ingrained program, how could anybody really be at fault.

Perhaps what is really happening is that we prefer to assign blame to someone rather than understand our true internal condition. And if we really do sleep, living out some inculcated programmed finger-pointing, and with the world so clearly headed to disaster why would we never wonder why?
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
45,884
32,665
136
Can the ruling be overturned if Alito and Thomas happen to retire/die while a Liberal is in office?

Assuming the Ds still have the senate, sure. McConnell won't allow Biden a vote on any replacements if they loose it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

z1ggy

Lifer
May 17, 2008
10,004
63
91
Oh and I forgot to add, listening to a podcast this morning, polls taken in the past had shown only 19% of the country at large agrees with an outright abortion ban. Not sure when the poll was done, method so on and so on but I feel like even if you ask many of the more "modern" Trump voters (I'm thinking the moderately wealthy white types) they would probably still agree a TOTAL ban is nutty.

How is this democracy? A major law that could be on the books for just as long as it was originally where only 1/5 of the country wants it, is fundamentally not democratic.
 

z1ggy

Lifer
May 17, 2008
10,004
63
91
Assuming the Ds still have the senate, sure. McConnell won't allow Biden a vote on any replacements if they loose it.
Sadly, I was thinking more like... 2-3 presidents from now. Alito could live and be on the court for another 10 years. Do we think ol Mitch is going to be kicking around in the Senate at age 90?
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
5,271
1,441
136
And even if there is a "health of the mother" exception in states like Texas (unlikely as they have shown time and again they care nothing about the health of their residents), what's the cut off line? Lets say a pregnant woman has a complication that increases the chance of her dying but isn't guaranteed it will kill her. Is there a percentage chance that's the cut off? Would a woman who is 70% chance likely to die be allowed to abort but a 25% chance isn't? If the 25% chance woman has a fetus that is wholly unviable allowed or not allowed? What's the cutoff of viability of the fetus vs survival percentage of the pregnant woman? I have a friend who had to get what would have been her second child aborted due to hemorrhaging and almost couldn't get a doctor to do it because of restrictive abortion laws in my state so this stuff is on my mind a lot

This 100%, even if there is a exception to save a mother's life. What can happen is local District Attorney's can play Medical Monday Morning quarterback and still charge a doctor even if the procedure was medically necessary. Most doctors are not going to want to take the chance so this will have such a effect that only in the most extreme circumstances will a abortion be done to save a mother's life. I assume your friend was trying to get a Abortion probably in the 3rd trimester and several states have made already made late term abortions very difficult even when it is medically necessary because doctors don't want to deal with the possible prosecution from the state.
 

Viper1j

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2018
4,168
3,645
136
I live in a solid blue state in the north east, so I'm not terribly concerned about this affecting my daughter's life... But maybe it could. Can someone tell me - If she was say pregnant (whether she did or did not know) and was flying or traveling through a red state that bans abortion outright and she has a medical emergency requiring either aborting the fetus/baby or she dies, is she just 100% screwed? What if she's a working professional and pregnant, flies to Texas for example, for business and while there, needs a life saving procedure which would (sadly) end the child's life, but if not done... she will die? Does that count as abortion or a medical procedure outside of that law?

I'm trying to decide if I need to be upset/concerned or just roll my eyes at yet another page in the American Disaster book.

As a POC, (Pilot of Color), I have consistently filed my flight plans, to bypass/fly over red states to the greatest possible extent for the last 8 years.. The only way I would ever consider landing at DFW, would be if I declared an emergency under FAA guidelines, and crashed.
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
6,447
7,615
136
Alito’s draft opinion already alludes to - in his phrasing, an unenumerated right (like abortion) can only be protected by the courts where they have a strong basis in the history and traditions of the country. He specifically mentions both Lawrence v Texas (sodomy) and Obergefell v. Hodges as being likewise poorly decided. The only thing that would perhaps save those rulings would be one of the five who agreed to overturn Roe with him balking on those, which I would not count on.

So ... Obergefell v. Hodges essentially suffers from the same “defects” Alito found in Roe, and would seem a hot candidate for being overturned. Griswold v. Connecticut rests on similar concepts.

If Griswold goes, then privacy largely goes with it, it will remain to be seen if Roe can go without Griswold going. Many smart legal minds have long said it would be very difficult to overturn Roe but uphold the privacy conclusions that essentially made Roe an obvious decision, and those come from Griswold, without eventually overturning Griswold as well. Otherwise you are staking out that Griswold establishes a right to privacy for everything other than abortion, which suffers many of the logical defects Alito asserts about Roe. The reason you will struggle with this regime legally is because it is hard to enforce many laws against abortion if there is a robust right to privacy, because the State has to intrude fairly far into your privacy to enforce those laws. Once the right is undermined, how does Griswold stand? Without Griswold how does privacy as a constitutional right stand?

There is also a movement for a national abortion ban. Major antiabortion groups have already spoken with Trump and other top Republican Presidential contenders in 2024 and all of them say they would have no problem running with a nationwide abortion ban bill as a centerpiece of their campaigns. 6 in 10 Americans are against Roe v. Wade being overturned, but the reality is only a small portion of that 6 in 10 votes on the topic, plenty of them support abortion rights in principle, but not enough to make them vote for Democrats.


The filibuster likely won’t protect anything – Republicans will certainly dispense with the filibuster if they control both houses of Congress and the White House, because they will wager they will never again be in the minority so there is no reason to keep a relic of minority power in the Senate.
 

emperus

Diamond Member
Apr 6, 2012
7,758
1,489
126
My guess is the leak came from a liberal leaning staffer. Original vote was 5-4 with the majority electing to have Alto write the opinion. Given the language used, someone was so shocked they leaked the document. This forces Roberts to switch his vote, the final vote is 6-3, and Roberts as Chief Justice seizes the opinion back and scraps it for a much more tempered one. Barratt and Kavanagh sign the majority opinion, Alito issues his original opinion as a concurring one which Thomas signs on to. Roe is still gone, which was inevitable, but Alito's rhetoric gets essentially thrown in the dumpster.
I think your off. I think a conservative leaked it for maybe 1 of 2 or possibly both reasons. They were concerned Roberts may actually negotiate a deal where it is 6-3 to limit abortion to 15 weeks but not overturn Roe vs. Wade. Or the 2nd reason that they want to let the blood as far away from the midterms as possible. I may be wrong but I think everyone thought Roe was on it's last legs with this hyper partisan conservative court.
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
6,447
7,615
136
Actually .... If Alito is soooooo worried about the "traditions of the country" - Then Alito should rule in favor of abortions because abortions have been legal throughout most American history. The first laws criminalizing abortion in the United States were enacted in 1880. They were overturned in 1973. So abortions have been completely legal for 153 of the 246 years the country has existed, and were legal in many states during the 93 year period when they were not legal in all of the states. So the right to have an abortion clearly has a strong basis in the history and traditions of the country.. I suspect Alito would change his rationale so fast the goalposts would redshift.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
25,987
23,782
136
And just go full on guns… make some trades, assault weapons but background checks… They will come.
To get anywhere on guns with people who care about guns a democrat would have to publicly declare that everyone should have guns at all times. Even then there would be some nutter on the right who would call that position to restrictive.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
45,884
32,665
136
Actually .... If Alito is soooooo worried about the "traditions of the country" - Then Alito should rule in favor of abortions because abortions have been legal throughout most American history. The first laws criminalizing abortion in the United States were enacted in 1880. They were overturned in 1973. So abortions have been completely legal for 153 of the 246 years the country has existed, and were legal in many states during the 93 year period when they were not legal in all of the states. So the right to have an abortion clearly has a strong basis in the history and traditions of the country.. I suspect Alito would change his rationale so fast the goalposts would redshift.

The lack of any consistency whatsoever in stated logic or decision making is a feature not a bug for conservatives on the court. Things mean whatever they say it does no matter if factually wrong or if it conflicts with something else they said. Pure Calvinball for partisanship.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,043
12,712
136
To get anywhere on guns with people who care about guns a democrat would have to publicly declare that everyone should have guns at all times. Even then there would be some nutter on the right who would call that position to restrictive.

Dont know man, just know you need the votes *right now*.
 

gothuevos

Golden Member
Jul 28, 2010
1,858
1,624
136
I wonder how this will affect women who get IVF and have to get multiple embryos implanted, often needing to selectively reduce a few so that they aren't carrying six babies for example. Now? The mom has to carry the multiples at great risk to herself and the fetuses?

Actually, I fully expect any nationwide abortion ban bill to include language barring contraceptives and assisted reproduction. "Not natural."
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,201
28,216
136
I sense growing pressure on Manchinema. Ending the filibuster will be back in play
Good luck with that.
eSGbx30.jpeg