Do Republicans appreciate what losing Roe V Wade will do to them?

[mayfly13]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/24/thomas-constitutional-rights-00042256

Thomas wants to keep going

He's Black!
His ruling is going to gut poor and minority (Black included) women, who don't have money to travel and seek procedures hundreds of miles away.
shame on him

 

[butters]

collins and manchin imply they were misled by gorsuch and kavanaugh

“This decision is inconsistent with what Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh said in their testimony and their meetings with me, where they both were insistent on the importance of supporting long-standing precedents that the country has relied upon," Collins said in a statement.

She blasted the ruling as "a sudden and radical jolt to the country that will lead to political chaos, anger, and a further loss of confidence in our government."

Manchin said he's "deeply disappointed" in the justices.

"I trusted Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh when they testified under oath that they also believed Roe v. Wade was settled legal precedent and I am alarmed they chose to reject the stability the ruling has provided for two generations of Americans," he said.

Kavanaugh told the Senate at his 2018 confirmation hearing that the Roe decision "is important precedent of the Supreme Court that has been reaffirmed many times." Gorsuch, at his 2017 hearing, said of Roe that "a good judge will consider it as precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...sedgntp&cvid=e7e1a545ed3c49f29df7cb138cb2e6d6

are they more worried about the votes they'll lose when next up for election? people are gonna be pissed.

so if members who voted for them to be seated on SCOTUS think they were lied to, are there legal steps to remove them from office? i don't suppose there are but just asking.

 

[rockcasbah]

Eyer and the other posters against killing babies will now be unbanned, right?

 

[LincolnDuncan]

Most US citizens who identify as anti-abortion show no evidence that they really care about the lives of fetuses or babies. They just want to punish. They are the American Taliban!

 

[butters]

U.S. companies including Walt Disney Co and Facebook parent Meta Platforms Inc said on Friday they will cover employees' expenses if they have to travel for abortion services after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/ne...sedgntp&cvid=e7e1a545ed3c49f29df7cb138cb2e6d6

companies offering this help, though, may run up against new state decisions that hold employers accountable in such instances for 'aiding and abetting a crime' and so while it's good they offer this it might not be legally possible for them to do so.

 

[Cobaltofdark]

Mid terms just turned every women in america to a Democrat and it's the minority that wants it overturned

 

[colddiesel]

1. The decision will not have the slightest impact on the mid terms which will be very bad for the D's.
2. The Pro lifers are going to experience organized opposition in the State legislatures more vigorous than they imagined in their worst nightmares. That will extend well beyond the abortion issue.
3. The Abortion debate has been lost at the Federal level but there are so many workarounds that the net impact on births/terminations will be modest.
4. The intent of Roe v wade was good but it was very poor law.
5. Gorsuch and Kavanagh both lied to the Senate hearings that they would support the Roe precedent. It will not hurt them much.
6. The extrapolation of Thomas' ramblings are of far more concern than this particular decision.
7. I have made a small investment in an Indian company that supplies 'morning after' pills by internet order.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

They will lose the vote of women, of those who care for women, of those who are raising women, of those who think women can think for themselves, of those who want to fuck women, of those who work in healthcare, etc ad nauseum. And not all of those people are women. Duh, MAGATS will never get it. This is the beginning of a gigantic political backlash against these jackholes and I am here for it.

Nothing changes in NYC.

 

[Cobaltofdark]

1. The decision will not have the slightest impact on the mid terms which will be very bad for the D's.
2. The Pro lifers are going to experience organized opposition in the State legislatures more vigorous than they imagined in their worst nightmares. That will extend well beyond the abortion issue.
3. The Abortion debate has been lost at the Federal level but there are so many workarounds that the net impact on births/terminations will be modest.
4. The intent of Roe v wade was good but it was very poor law.
5. Gorsuch and Kavanagh both lied to the Senate hearings that they would support the Roe precedent. It will not hurt them much.
6. The extrapolation of Thomas' ramblings are of far more concern than this particular decision.
7. I have made a small investment in an Indian company that supplies 'morning after' pills by internet order.

You've never seen a truly pissed off woman dude you just woke the beast from its slumber may god have mercy on all your souls lol

 

[mayfly13]

7. I have made a small investment in an Indian company that supplies 'morning after' pills by internet order.

rofl
you're kind of right, that Will be good business.

 

[Rotadom]

I wonder what the Trumplicans think they "won" with this decision.

 

[Chernosoth]

Both parties are contradictory about body autonomy. They are both teeming with control freaks. The election is a decision of which control freaks are currently less dangerous.

 

[YDB95]

As usual, Biden is full of shit. There was never a right to abortion enumerated in the Constitution. It was a phony construction of a leftist court that has been corrected by a true interpretation of the Constitution.

The same Constitution that defines Black people as 3/5 of a human being? They call it a living document for a reason. Disagree all you want with the reasoning behind the right to privacy, but it is based on a sound reading of various amendments.

As for why the term "right to privacy" does not specifically appear in the Constitution, that's easy: In the 18th century, "privacy" was a euphemism for the bathroom. So if you asked Thomas Jefferson about the right to privacy, he'd think you were talking about the right to pee. Even the slaves he owned had that right - sort of - so why put it in the Constitution?

Last but not least, if you think pro-choice Americans are going to just accept this ruling and go home...eh, but you don't. Even you don't believe that.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Both parties are contradictory about body autonomy. They are both teeming with control freaks. The election is a decision of which control freaks are currently less dangerous.

How exactly is the left contradictory, unless you're pretending that vaccines fall under that category which they do not.

 

[KeithD]

The majority of the voters know what to do to put this right. With luck the Republicans have now truly jumped the shark and will be voted down enough for real Americans to do the codifying that needs to be done.

 

[Tigersman]

All women need to do to get their state legislatures to make abortion legal in every state is to tell their husbands or boyfriends that until the law was changed, they would have to cook their own meals, do their own laundry, run their own errands and forget about sex, then stick by their guns.

 

[jomar]

Most US citizens who identify as anti-abortion show no evidence that they really care about the lives of fetuses or babies. They just want to punish. They are the American Taliban!

As has been said, they are pro-birth not pro-life.

1. The decision will not have the slightest impact on the mid terms which will be very bad for the D's.

Maybe why they did it five months out, a lifetime in politics.

2. The Pro lifers are going to experience organized opposition in the State legislatures more vigorous than they imagined in their worst nightmares. That will extend well beyond the abortion issue.

I do hope so. Republicans want them born but don’t support them afterwards.

3. The Abortion debate has been lost at the Federal level but there are so many workarounds that the net impact on births/terminations will be modest.

Awesome all those companies paying for travel.

4. The intent of Roe v wade was good but it was very poor law.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...sts-misreading-constitution-silence-abortion/
https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1442&context=concomm

5. Gorsuch and Kavanagh both lied to the Senate hearings that they would support the Roe precedent. It will not hurt them much.

Perhaps, but they are forever tainted by their lie.

6. The extrapolation of Thomas' ramblings are of far more concern than this particular decision.

Yes.

7. I have made a small investment in an Indian company that supplies 'morning after' pills by internet order.

Probably a good move.

 

[HisArpy]

I wonder what the Trumplicans think they "won" with this decision.

We won a return to the rule of law instead of consensus by mob feelings.

I've said many many many many times that Roe was poorly supported legally. There is sufficient protection in the Constitution for abortion in the 4th Amendment but no one could figure out how to argue it, either when Roe was decided or since.

For those who insist that abortion isn't mentioned in the Constitution, please point out the words "semi automatic" in the 2nd Amendment and I'll agree with your position. On second thought, don't bother trying because the point here is that modern advances and inventions are still covered by the Bill of Rights and specific enumeration of specific items isn't required for the Right to attach.

It's for that reason that Abortion is within the 4th Amendment's "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects" clause. If the towering minds which infest our legal system actually knew what the Constitution says, they'd have known that. Had they, Roe would still be solid precedent.

 

[Rightguide]

collins and manchin imply they were misled by gorsuch and kavanaugh




https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...sedgntp&cvid=e7e1a545ed3c49f29df7cb138cb2e6d6

are they more worried about the votes they'll lose when next up for election? people are gonna be pissed.

so if members who voted for them to be seated on SCOTUS think they were lied to, are there legal steps to remove them from office? i don't suppose there are but just asking.

Stop beating this dead horse about their testimony. Justices never reveal how they are going to rule on a given case. Both justices did not lie to the Senate. When asked if Roe was settled law, it was at the time the question was asked, as it was the day before this decision was released. I don't recall either Judge being asked if Roe was constitutional. The principle of stare decisis does not protect or enshrine decisions wrongly decided or clearly unconstitutional on their face, as was proven by Dred Scott, Plessy v. Ferguson, or any of the 300 cases where the SCOTUS has reversed itself. This from Friday's decision reversing Roe:

"The critical question is whether the Constitution, properly understood, confers a right to obtain an abortion. Casey’s controlling opinion skipped over that question and reaffirmed Roe solely on the basis of stare decisis. A proper application of stare decisis, however, requires an assessment of the strength of the grounds on which Roe was based. The Court therefore turns to the question that the Casey plurality did not consider,"

 

[Rightguide]

Mid terms just turned every women in america to a Democrat and it's the minority that wants it overturned

71% of Americans support abortion restrictions:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/americans-support-abortion-restrictions-poll

 

[LukSkyFokker]

71% of Americans support abortion restrictions:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/americans-support-abortion-restrictions-poll

This isn't about restrictions, vettedummy.

 

[ll74]

71% of Americans support abortion restrictions:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/americans-support-abortion-restrictions-poll

How many support banning abortions?

Fetal personhood?

Restrictions existed prior to this ruling

 

[Rightguide]

He's Black!
His ruling is going to gut poor and minority (Black included) women, who don't have money to travel and seek procedures hundreds of miles away.
shame on him

One of the main purposes in the founding of planned parenthood was Margaret Sanger's belief in Eugenics and the control unwanted minority populations, which, in reality, is a large part of what it does today. The majority of abortions today are performed on black or Hispanic women. Almost four times as many black women as white women have abortions. If you know the history of Sanger and supporters of Eugenics in America one can see it's going according to plan.

https://www.liveaction.org/news/black-women-abort-four-times-rate-white/

 

[oggbashan]

One of the main purposes in the founding of planned parenthood was Margaret Sanger's belief in Eugenics and the control unwanted minority populations, which, in reality, is a large part of what it does today. The majority of abortions today are performed on black or Hispanic women. Almost four times as many black women as white women have abortions. If you know the history of Sanger and supporters of Eugenics in America one can see it's going according to plan.

https://www.liveaction.org/news/black-women-abort-four-times-rate-white/

***** OOPs! Duplicate.

 

[oggbashan]

The abolition of Roe V Wade could result in an explosion of black children. Is that what the US (and the Republicans) want?