SCOTUS to hear Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case on Wed.

[BabyBoomer50s]

Big day this week. Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch is optimistic that the state will prevail. “I’m excited,” she says. “I truly believe that the Supreme Court is going to take a hard look at this and give us some good directions to protect life.”

 

[ll74]

NY AG:

“Time and again, Mississippi and other conservative-led states have sought to turn back the clocks and legislate against women’s bodies,” said Attorney General James. “What’s worse is that this 15-week ban on abortions is not even the most restrictive law Mississippi has passed seeking to curtail women’s reproductive freedoms. With this case, we are sending a message to Mississippi, and all other states attempting to restrict access to safe, legal abortions that no party, no person, and no government entity can legally control women’s bodies, their choices, or their freedoms. And for those who continue to try, my office will use every legal tool available to prioritize the safety, wellness, and rights of women across this country.”

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

NY AG:

New York’s Attorney General is worried the law will spread to her state.

 

[ll74]

New York’s Attorney General is worried the law will spread to her state.

Mississippi's AG is worried that she won't be reelected because Trump will call her weak.

 

[pecksniff]

I can't believe a woman's right to choose is still being challenged and litigated. This whole issue should have gone away forever in the 1970s.

 

[ll74]

But yes, NY AG doesn't believe the law is constitutional, so of course she's afraid it will be seen as anything but....that would be why she filed her brief against it.

 

[ll74]

Further...:

Petitioners now ask the Court to overturn that viability rule, but they have not advanced the kind of special justification required to abandon an established precedent of this Court. The viability rule is a straightforward and workable standard; millions of women and families have reasonably relied on it in ordering their lives; the States have relied on it in structuring their policies; it has not been overtaken by any factual or legal developments; and it represents a reasonable constitutional judgment that this Court has repeatedly reaffirmed.

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/19-1392_amicus_brief.pdf

 

[JohnnySavage]

Mississippi has one of the lowest literacy rates, one of the highest mortality rates, one of the highest poverty rates... and they are pissing around with abortion. What a shit-hole state.

 

[ll74]

Mississippi has one of the lowest literacy rates, one of the highest mortality rates, one of the highest poverty rates... and they are pissing around with abortion. What a shit-hole state.

Valid - if any state had an indicator of outlawing abortion leading to coat hangers, this would be the one.

 

[JohnnySavage]

They should teach their citizens how to read the instructions on a condom wrapper. Problem solved.

 

[ll74]

They should teach their citizens how to read the instructions on a condom wrapper. Problem solved.

They don't teach about condoms at all.

Curriculum must stress abstinence through “abstinence-only” or “abstinence-plus” instruction.

https://siecus.org/state_profile/mississippi-state-profile/

And of course, these gems added:

-Curriculum must inform students of current state law related to homosexual activity. While Mississippi Code Annotated 97-29-59 outlaws sodomy, stating that “Every person who shall be convicted of the detestable and abominable crime against nature committed with mankind or with a beast, shall be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary for a term of not more than ten years”, the United States Supreme Court handed down a decision in Lawrence v. Texas that declared state laws criminalizing homosexual behavior to be unconstitutional in 2003.
-Curriculum is not required to include instruction on consent.
-Parents or guardians must receive notification at least one week prior to the provision of any human sexuality instruction. Schools must receive written permission from a parent or guardian before a student can participate in a sex education course. This is referred to as an “opt-in” policy.
-Mississippi has no standard regarding medically accurate sex education instruction.

Their priorities are to make sure kids know the gays are evil and that touching is bad.

 

[LupusDei]

Either one sees all women as slaves or they support their body independence right, including, to receive qualified and unconditional medical help for abortion.

Frankly, there's nothing actually nothing wrong of being pro slavery. That's a time proven economic system. But all the so called "pro-lifers" should realize and admit to themselves that's exactly what they stand for.

No, there's no middle ground on this, it is a truly rare case of a clear either-or situation. Slavery, or unconditional medical abortions.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

As Ms. Fitch notes, the world had changed. “Modern options regarding and views about childbearing have dulled concerns on which Roe rested.”

“Maternity leave is very commonplace, where it wasn’t 50 years ago.” She goes on to point out that “paternity leave was unheard of 50 years ago.”

There has also been a shift in cultural expectations since the days when SCOTUS fabricated a constitutional right to abortion.

A friend-of-the-court brief, signed by 240 female scholars and professionals and pro-life feminist groups, echoes the point: “Ironically, under the guise of women’s rights, equality arguments for abortion suggest that females are intrinsically blighted by their reproductive capacity to bear children. These arguments tend, unwittingly perhaps, to promote the male childless norm in educational and employment settings.”

 

[Rightguide]

I can't believe a woman's right to choose is still being challenged and litigated. This whole issue should have gone away forever in the 1970s.

It's being challenged because the Roe decision was weak and nonexistent in the black letter of the Constitution. It was an invention grounded in alleged penumbras building upon the undefined "right of privacy" the U.S. Supreme Court found in Griswold v. Connecticut. In that case Justice William O. Douglas, then in mental decline himself, imaginatively explained it could be found in "penumbras" created by "emanations" in the Bill of Rights.

So elusive was it Harry Blackmun in writing the 7-2 majority decision in Roe, couldn't find it either:

“The right of privacy, whether it be founded in the 14th Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restriction upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”

So no matter where or what it was Harry felt the 14th Amendment was big enough to include it.

William Rehnquist in his dissent pointing out the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 and that 36 states had already passed laws limiting abortion, remarked:

“To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of that Amendment.”

So therein lies the dilemma the court finds itself in today and why we're still contesting the irrationality of the 1973 SCOTUS decision that simply invented something out of whole cloth.

The real solution to the problem in my opinion is for Congress to simply declare through appropriate legislation that the unborn at some point of viability are, therefore "persons" as the term applies to the 14th's guarantee that no state “shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Or simply pass a law under Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution, limiting the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court regarding abortion.

The bottom line is there is no constitutional role for the federal government in the question of abortion. It should be totally within the jurisdiction of the states.

 

[pecksniff]

It's being challenged because the Roe decision was weak and nonexistent in the black letter of the Constitution.

What I am stating incredulity about is the very existence of a "pro-life" movement. Of course I believe it exists, but I cannot, you know, believe it exists.

 

[KeithD]

Maybe someday it will occur to the majority voters that they actually have to go out and vote for the rights they have to have.

I can't believe, with the stark comparison between what the Trump "administration" and the Biden administration has tried to do for the citizens, that there's any talk of Trump being ahead in the polls for 2024 over Biden (or whoever runs then).

But there you go. The majority talks but it doesn't go en masse to the election polls.

 

[Rightguide]

What I am stating incredulity about is the very existence of a "pro-life" movement. Of course I believe it exists, but I cannot, you know, believe it exists.

Well for as long as I've been reading you you've failed to acknowledge the existence of much of reality.

 

[Rightguide]

Maybe someday it will occur to the majority voters that they actually have to go out and vote for the rights they have to have.

I can't believe, with the stark comparison between what the Trump "administration" and the Biden administration has tried to do for the citizens, that there's any talk of Trump being ahead in the polls for 2024 over Biden (or whoever runs then).

Ignorance is your main problem. Denial is another. In your case, it's the psychological defense you use to reduce anxiety when evidence is submitted proving a point that feels particularly disturbing to you.

 

[Rightguide]

Maybe someday it will occur to the majority voters that they actually have to go out and vote for the rights they have to have.

I can't believe, with the stark comparison between what the Trump "administration" and the Biden administration has tried to do for the citizens, that there's any talk of Trump being ahead in the polls for 2024 over Biden (or whoever runs then).

But there you go. The majority talks but it doesn't go en masse to the election polls.

Women simply have to get together and lobby their state legislatures for the right to abortion. If they have enough votes they'll get it.

 

[KeithD]

Ignorance is your main problem. Denial is another. In your case, it's the psychological defense you use to reduce anxiety when evidence is submitted proving a point that feels particularly disturbing to you.

You're a bullshitter.

 

[Rightguide]

You're a bullshitter.

Nothing I've said as fact is bullshit.

 

[pecksniff]

Well, now we'll find out how the SCOTUS in its present formation really feels about Roe v. Wade.

 

[Rightguide]

Well, now we'll find out how the SCOTUS in its present formation really feels about Roe v. Wade.

We will. I've never said which way they'll go, but Roe was ignorant and wrong. There are now some serious constitutional minds on the court who I suspect feel the same way former Chief Justice Rehnquist did about the 14th Amendment. So, we'll see.

 

[pecksniff]

We will. I've never said which way they'll go, but Roe was ignorant and wrong. There are now some serious constitutional minds on the court who I suspect feel the same way former Chief Justice Rehnquist did about the 14th Amendment. So, we'll see.

How did Rehnquist feel about the 14th Amendment?

I hope he wasn't one of those idiots (yes, they actually exist) who reject the legitimacy of all the Civil War amendments.

 

[Rightguide]

How did Rehnquist feel about the 14th Amendment?

I hope he wasn't one of those idiots (yes, they actually exist) who reject the legitimacy of all the Civil War amendments.

From post 14:

William Rehnquist in his dissent pointing out the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 and that 36 states had already passed laws limiting abortion, remarked:

“To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of that Amendment.”