Roe v Wade has essentially been overturned.

[Crazyhole]

SCOTUS declined to hear or put a stay on the Texas abortion law. If a heartbeat is detected, it is a crime to abort the baby. This law is more strict than the Mississippi law that they will hear this session, and they didn't have 5 votes to put a stay on it. That should be a signal that Roe is no longer going to be relevant.

 

[Boosted87]

SCOTUS declined to hear or put a stay on the Texas abortion law. If a heartbeat is detected, it is a crime to abort the baby. This law is more strict than the Mississippi law that they will hear this session, and they didn't have 5 votes to put a stay on it. That should be a signal that Roe is no longer going to be relevant.

Assuming your right, does this invert SCOTUS as a political issue for the next 30 or 40 years? Right wing loses it as a political motivator and it becomes a driving political force on the other end?

 

[B wizzle man]

Sounds good to me. Hooray for life.

 

[Crazyhole]

Assuming your right, does this invert SCOTUS as a political issue for the next 30 or 40 years? Right wing loses it as a political motivator and it becomes a driving political force on the other end?

I think so, and it takes the abortion battle to the state level. It could, and probably will bring down planned parenthood. The left will probably overreach on the national level and try to pack the court.

Other than the 2nd amendment, I can't think of a more defining issue for the political parties. This could be huge.

 

[fried-chicken]

The law defines pregnancy as the first day of the woman's last period. Meaning by the time she is 1 day late, it's 4 weeks into the 6 week time limit.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Assuming your right, does this invert SCOTUS as a political issue for the next 30 or 40 years? Right wing loses it as a political motivator and it becomes a driving political force on the other end?

No, because this really just leaves it up to State legislators to decide how much fetus smashing they're going to permit. Texas is still in the same spot as it was a day ago; if they elect enough D's on the basis of overturning their own abortion law then it'll be done. Blue states are probably going to go overboard now to virtue signal how committed to the cause they are.

This does nothing to solidify that abortion is in violation of the unborn's constitutional rights and thus it is no less of a political issue for pro-lifers than it was yesterday.

 

[fried-chicken]

DO NOT have sex with women from Texas

 

[UCFBS]

I don't like the federal government letting states say what a person can do with their body. It's a civil right, end of story. Same with the right to self defense. States that prevent that are also just as guilty, and the federal government should guarantee civil rights.

We'll see where the Texas law stands when it gets challenged again, as it will.

DO NOT have sex with women from Texas

Now that's damn funny! I might have to take you off of ignore.

 

[Cubs79]

No, because this really just leaves it up to State legislators to decide how much fetus smashing they're going to permit. Texas is still in the same spot as it was a day ago; if they elect enough D's on the basis of overturning their own abortion law then it'll be done. Blue states are probably going to go overboard now to virtue signal how committed to the cause they are.

This does nothing to solidify that abortion is in violation of the unborn's constitutional rights and thus it is no less of a political issue for pro-lifers than it was yesterday.

If abortions are no longer happening, it will most certainly not be a political issue to anywhere near the degree it is now.

 

[Cubs79]

THis is one of those things where I can see a lot of unintended consequences. The way this is written, this could easily be applied to other issues, some of which Republicans might very well not like very much.

 

[fried-chicken]

Are we forcing these women to pay for the pregnancy medical care too or is the fetus on the hook for that?

 

[UCFBS]

Are we forcing these women to pay for the pregnancy medical care too or is the fetus on the hook for that?

Ironically, that's going to be part of these types of lawsuits too.

 

[UCFKnight85]

If abortions are no longer happening, it will most certainly not be a political issue to anywhere near the degree it is now.

My point is that SCOTUS basically just punted this back to where it was. There is no "landmark ruling" in any direction here; Texas could in theory snapback on new legislature at any time. So long as abortion is still legally permitted then the political issue will remain.

 

[Crazyhole]

My point is that SCOTUS basically just punted this back to where it was. There is no "landmark ruling" in any direction here; Texas could in theory snapback on new legislature at any time. So long as abortion is still legally permitted then the political issue will remain.

It gives us a indication on how they are going to rule in the Mississippi case.

 

[chemmie]

No, because this really just leaves it up to State legislators to decide how much fetus smashing they're going to permit. Texas is still in the same spot as it was a day ago; if they elect enough D's on the basis of overturning their own abortion law then it'll be done. Blue states are probably going to go overboard now to virtue signal how committed to the cause they are.

This does nothing to solidify that abortion is in violation of the unborn's constitutional rights and thus it is no less of a political issue for pro-lifers than it was yesterday.

85 doesn't like destroying blobs of cells.
But once they are born, hand them off to your priest to diddle them all he wants!!

 

[UCFKnight85]

It gives us a indication on how they are going to rule in the Mississippi case.

Maybe

 

[Crazyhole]

Maybe

Here's how the vote came down. Hard to see a scenario where they don't vote the same way later.

 

[goodknightfl]

Science will render it illegal. The younger we can care for a fetus out of the womb, and prove it is human and not flesh, the law becomes more and more a crime against humanity.

 

[UCFBS]

My point is that SCOTUS basically just punted this back to where it was. There is no "landmark ruling" in any direction here; Texas could in theory snapback on new legislature at any time. So long as abortion is still legally permitted then the political issue will remain.

This is similar to the eviction moratorium.

The SCOTUS extended it, but warned the President to get Congress involved, and he didn't so ... yeah, they nuked it later. Federal agencies of the Executive don't have carte blanche to unilaterally pull that.

The SCOTUS refused to hear it because the parties that were involved did NOT have standing to open the lawsuit. When parties that DO have standing are involved, the SCOTUS will get involved.

I think everyone is going to be surprised what the 3 Libertarians do on the court, at least 2 of them.

 

[sk8knight]

Lefties: we can’t attack the second amendment so we’ll push for private citizens to sue the gun companies to put them out of business.

Texas: Damn, son. That’s pretty clever. Let’s use that and create a law where private citizens can sue abortion providers.

Lefties:

 

[UCFBS]

Lefties: we can’t attack the second amendment so we’ll push for private citizens to sue the gun companies to put them out of business.

Texas: Damn, son. That’s pretty clever. Let’s use that and create a law where private citizens can sue abortion providers.

Lefties:

That's exactly what it was!

I said for years to my Progressive colleagues to stop the non-sense because it wasn't successful lawsuit verdicts, but lawyers before they even got to court, that were bankrupting companies ... and they thought that was okay.

And now, we have the opposite.

 

[UCFBS]

View embedded media

Here's how the vote came down. Hard to see a scenario where they don't vote the same way later.

No, I do see it. Kavanaugh is not the conservative everyone thinks he is. He's a Libertarian Constitutionalist, even more so that Gorsuch.

They shot it down because the plantiffs didn't have standing. They will shoot it again if it's about Congressional or State authority.

I think people will be surprised what happens when it's overturned 6-3 or 5-4 in the courts when the correct party is involved.

 

[DaShuckster]

Lefties: we can’t attack the second amendment so we’ll push for private citizens to sue the gun companies to put them out of business.

Texas: Damn, son. That’s pretty clever. Let’s use that and create a law where private citizens can sue abortion providers.

Be careful what you wish for. If the bounty hunter provision of that Texas law hold, then what's to stop private citizens from suing the gun companies in the same way? If all life is sacred, then gun providers are no different than abortion clinics.

 

[Crazyhole]

Be careful what you wish for. If the bounty hunter provision of that Texas law hold, then what's to stop private citizens from suing the gun companies in the same way? If all life is sacred, then gun providers are no different than abortion clinics.

False equivalency. Make the same case for cars used in DUI homicides and you'll see how ridiculous you sound.

 

[UCFBS]

Someone with actual standing, unlike in Texas, is suing over the Mississippi law, hence why the SCOTUS is now willing to hear a case on these pre-viability laws. Date is now set for December 1st, and arguments will be in-person.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

SCOTUS is also taking up access to concealed and other public carry laws, such as in the state of New York, which makes it impossible for every day citizens to acquire permits. The SCOTUS are limiting the case to ruling whether or not a state can blindly deny permits without review of merit, when they are filed by ordinary citizens.

Supreme Court To Take Up 1st Major Gun Rights Case In More Than A Decade

At issue is how much the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to carry concealed weapons outside their home for self-defense. The case will likely be argued in the fall.

www.npr.org

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The court currently stands at 3-3-3 Progressive-Libertarian-Conservative Justices, with the Libertarians being big on both existing, Supreme Law, and separation of powers, including sending things back to Congress and States. It will be interesting to watch how this all unfolds.

E.g., it's very likely the Libertarians could swing in either direction, depending on the arguments made by the 2 parties. Do they side with state's rights in both cases? Or do they argue the precedents of prior, Supreme Law on the individual rights of women and citizens alike, over the state? Or do they split?

 

[Cubs79]

Lefties: we can’t attack the second amendment so we’ll push for private citizens to sue the gun companies to put them out of business.

Texas: Damn, son. That’s pretty clever. Let’s use that and create a law where private citizens can sue abortion providers.

Lefties:

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article256524466.html

Looks like you are getting your wish. As I said in this thread, this was going to have unintended consequences that Republicans werent going to like.

 

[Cubs79]

Be careful what you wish for. If the bounty hunter provision of that Texas law hold, then what's to stop private citizens from suing the gun companies in the same way? If all life is sacred, then gun providers are no different than abortion clinics.

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article256524466.html

Yup.

 

[sk8knight]

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article256524466.html

Looks like you are getting your wish. As I said in this thread, this was going to have unintended consequences that Republicans werent going to like.

It was never my wish. It was already occurring and the media is just connecting the latest with the Texas law. It’s legislation run amok on either side. You can take this to automakers and fast food restaurants and candy makers and really any industry. Where does it stop?

 

[Cubs79]

It was never my wish. It was already occurring and the media is just connecting the latest with the Texas law. It’s legislation run amok on either side. You can take this to automakers and fast food restaurants and candy makers and really any industry. Where does it stop?

I dont know where it stops. The Texas law was clearly a "be careful what you wish for" type of thing. It was more than obvious if they could essentially work around federal law, that other states were going to try the same thing for other issues.

It wasnt already occuring. There were people that wanted the ability to sue gun manufacturers, but they werent allowed to. But the Texas abortion law has opened up a can of worms.

 

[UCFBS]

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article256524466.html

Looks like you are getting your wish. As I said in this thread, this was going to have unintended consequences that Republicans werent going to like.

That's how many gun laws, especially red flag laws, already work. They let citizens get the state to prosecute whomever they don't want, and totally bypass due process.

I.e., the Texas abortion law is based on similar, state red flag laws.

All of this just nukes American freedom and libertarianism.

 

[goodknightfl]

DO NOT have sex with women from Texas

Nah just wear 2 condoms. 2 are better than one.

 

[Crazyhole]

Already talking like it's a done deal. And attacking the Supreme Court.

 

[UCFBS]

I trust individual women and gun owners alike, more than the government, with its guns at the whims of the people. Always have, always will.

 

[Knight_Classes_begin_7pm]

85 doesn't like destroying blobs of cells.
But once they are born, hand them off to your priest to diddle them all he wants!!

exactly

 

[Poolside Knight]

turning back the clock 50 years. ‘Murica

 

[Cubs79]

turning back the clock 50 years. ‘Murica

View embedded media

Crazy this was leaked. Going to be interesting how this plays out on the campaign trails.

 

[USFSucks]

SCOTUS about to hand the mid terms to the Democrats

 

[UCFloridaTech]

Crazy this was leaked. Going to be interesting how this plays out on the campaign trails.

I'm almost certain Frank Underwood had something to do with this.

 

[Cubs79]

Doesnt this just make the SC another branch of partisan politics? All 3 of the Trump justices said Roe was settled law during their hearings. They lied. We have a SC now that is basically filled with politicians who will say whatever to get appointed, then do the opposite of what they say. This isnt the sign of a healthy Democracy if the SC is just going to start overturning settled laws.

 

[Cubs79]

SCOTUS about to hand the mid terms to the Democrats

I think that is certainly possible, if not likely. I cant see this helping Republicans at all, especially at the state levels. On the other hand, Democrats might very well look at it like what is the point of even voting? Democrats hold the presidency, congress, and senate, and yet the SC is literally rolling back rights on the Democrats watch. Either way, this isnt good for the country or the future of the courts. If the SC is looked at as another wing of partisan politics, then the SC is pointless, and if courts are pointless our whole system easily becomes more corrupt.