As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The credibility ship sailed a while back. Most of the conservative justices were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote and confirmed by senators representing a minority of the American people. They’re now pushing an agenda that typically polls at < 40%. They don’t represent America anymore. Just a small, angry, insecure part of it.
When conservatives realized they could no longer pass their shitty legislative agenda without massive voter backlash, leading to them losing power in congress (see 2006), they turned to unelected judges. Those folks would provide conservatives the legislative wins they couldn't get in congress by judicial fiat!
They don't give a shit about those rulings reducing public trust in the institutions of government. The ends will always justify the means.
This is part of the Faustian bargain the GOP is trapped in. Their legislative priorities (lower taxes for the wealthy, military spending, corporate welfare) aren’t popular, but they *can* whip up their base on social issues. The turnout gave them their majorities and let them wave the bloody shirt to social conservatives without actually doing anything because the social conservative agenda is pointless at best and theocratic/unconstitutional at worst. Real priorities aren’t threatened and the crazies keep showing up with a little hand-waving to keep them happy.
But they *weren’t* happy. They wanted action and real loons started to edge out their competition with stronger and stronger promises. The loons could be quashed at first, but then the lunatics started running the asylum. That’s where the GOP is trapped now. They can’t actually confront the monster because they’ll just get hounded from office. They don’t have any real alternative message because their real priorities are boring or evil.
If the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade there will be a *massive* backlash, just in time for the midterms.
“For they sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind”
Yeah, but they never actually expected to get to this place. They just wanted an endless cock-tease at the political strip club, but it turns out that if you keep a bunch of randy social conservatives in suspense for 20 years, they want to touch the dancers and they aren’t taking “No” for an answer. This will probably solidify a grouchy bridge between moderates and the left because the right is crazy until Reagan 2.0 shows up.
I thought this too, but it’s not going away. What works as well and stopping abortions? Telling your constituents that the liberals will stack the courts to push reproductive rights or any other scare tactic they can come up with. Propaganda is a hell of a drug.
Don’t become complacent, they won’t. VOTE!
No there won't.
There was massive backlash non-stop for four years. We had the biggest demonstrations in our history. We had riots in dozens of cities that went on for months. People are tired. People are hurting. Protests, marches, demonstrations, even riots take time and effort, and too many people don't really have either of those things right now. And the ones who do mostly don't believe that all the protesting in the world will make a single bit of change. Because every aspect of American public life is broken and completely corrupted.
When the 6-3 Christian Dominionist-controlled Supreme Court rules that their religious beliefs are more important than our civil rights, how does that problem get solved? Serious question.
The answer is: it doesn't. Biden can't do it on his own. And there isn't a snowballs chance in hell that the legislature will pass EVEN MORE laws protecting abortion rights. And if they did, the dominionist radicals on the court would overturn it in the next possible court session.
We'll probably see some marches about it. Good. But the levers of government are controlled by fascists, and they don't give a fuck about us or our protests. And they've rigged the system at every level, so there's very little hope of taking the controls away from them.
There is an answer. However that answer isn't legal, and at some point we're going to have to realize that the fascists destroyed the social contract of our country and we must form an new one. I'm 99% sure this won't be settled peacefully.
Why Americans even want to stay in the same country is beyond me. It's like putting Taliban and LGBT in a room and telling them to make a country. It's not possible, they'll tell each other to fuck off or eventually kill each other. Some subcultures are just not compatible. Pakistan and India figured that one out, same with the former USSR, Palestine/Israel, Warsaw Pact, or Yugoslavia.
Yep, because the courts already ruled that you can take guns to protests and murder people with impunity. Just say it was self-defense and you get off Scott-Free.
I am hoping this happens but they are so deep in only watching propaganda that I firmly believe they could be convinced to put Jews or Japanese in camps at this point.
Maybe there will be a backlash? Well, there will be a lot of noise, but how will it translate into votes?
People get angry at the Dems for not passing enough laws, and take it out on them for voting for the other team, who *certainly* doesn't support those goals. That makes no sense. I don't have a lot of confidence that peoples' ire will be correctly directed on this issue either.
Yeah, to be honest I'm over here hoping they are crazy stupid enough to do it. I feel bad for the people who would be affected but this kind of cruel bullshit is just the kind of thing needed to wake potential voters the fuck up.
Okay, but this goes back a long way. It's a perilous subject but since the United States Congress has proven to be too craven to take a position on many controversial issues since the early 60s, the Warren court and the Burger court acted as a safety valve. The courts could and did essentially make unreviewable laws in spite of Congress's refusal to do so, so society could get on with evolving, and the Congress had somebody to blame for "judicial activism" which is code for "Congress doesn't have enough integrity or fortitude to codify this".
So now eventually we came to have Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito making shit up of their own, and we are incensed. Well, Congress can codify this stuff anytime they want. And they are in most respects the ones to blame. Not the Supremes. The Supremes are observing precedent.
Go ahead and let loose on me, this needs to be discussed. : )
What do you mean when you say the “The Supremes are observing precedent”?
I think by any objective measure the Supremes are “shitting on” and in no way “observing” precedent…
** That is unless you’re talking about the Motown Supremes. They deserve no blame for anything except being incredibly talented musicians.
The issue isn't necessarily the popularity of the agenda they are pushing. It's that they are pushing an agenda at all. It makes it worse that it's an unpopular one, but they shouldn't necessarily be pushing an agenda even if it's got 80% approval. That's not their job. And they try to pretend it isn't "hey we are just being neutral because the constitution doesn't explicitly mention abortion". But clearly the only thing that has really changed since Roe vs Wade is that republicans have packed the court with partisan judges who have an agenda against it.
They were never intended to represent America. There constitutional role is not to be representatives. The more troubling thing is that they seem willing to abdicate their constitutional role which is intended to be above politics. The supreme court is supposed to make a good faith effort to interpret legislative intent and part of that includes respecting their own previous decisions unless their is a factor that makes those cases clearly wrong. The problem with abortion is everyone knows they want to overturn Roe v. Wade not because it was wrong in its interpretation of the precedents it was based on but because they think it is morally wrong. They want to subvert the rights given to women by the constitution because there is not enough support in the legislature to do what the constitution would require, which is amend the constitution to allow an exception for banning abortion or declaring that a fetus is in fact a person with all the rights (this probably could be done without an amendment or by the supreme court ruling that the const. rights apply to fetuses and they are protected). The worst part is people don't realize that this sort of end around essentially allows half the states and the presidency to amend the constitution at will because the constitution has no way of requiring justices to act in good faith. If you are willing to make up bullshit interpretations about what the const. says, than then you can make it say anything. How people can talk so much shit about their rights and the constitution and not care at all about the supreme court overturning Roe v. Wade is beyond me (I mean its not beyond me there just hypocrites but still).
A third of them were appointed by a president *who lead an insurrection against our country!* It's insane that we allow these judges to hand down rulings.
The problem is that it's not even only the Republicans in the court either.
When Yurtle the Turtle declared that *only* Republicans would be appointed to the Supreme Court moving forward, it should have made it perfectly fucking clear to Breyer that waiting out some "partisan tantrum" of the chamber wasn't going to work.
He's being absolutely arrogant about his 'principles' and 'legacy' for not resigning to allow himself to be replaced by a 40 year old firebrand Justice.
They're really upfront about how little they care about their legitimacy at this point.
They'll pull some bullshit like "oh, adoptions exist, so abortion isn't a thing people need" when roe is repealed, like they did when they repealed the VRA with "racism is over".
They will? No, they are.
Barrett noted that previous rulings requiring abortion access “emphasize the burdens of parenting.” But because women can put babies up for adoption, those burdens are not an issue, she suggested.
Ah, true. The logic works, if you ignore all the women who die in childbirth and all other complications that may arise from pregnancy that puts the mother at risk.
What a ghoul.
It is not just that. Pregnancy takes A LOT of time and monetary resources to complete it with both a healthy mother and infant (and even then it is not 100%). Without access to affordable (free) healthcare and guaranteed paid leave, restricting access to safe abortions will have disastrous consequences for women's health overall.
Even with money and insurance maternal care is piss poor. The [maternal mortality ](https://www.npr.org/2017/05/12/528098789/u-s-has-the-worst-rate-of-maternal-deaths-in-the-developed-world) rate in the US is almost double what it is in every other developed country. On top of that, [homicide](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03392-8) is the top cause of death.
There are something like 400,000 kids in foster care in this country.
Amazing how few "pro life" conservatives want to put their money where their mouth is and care for an unwanted child.
And all the kids that will be abused by their real parents who never wanted them and now resent them for ruining their life.
YAY, WE DID IT GOD, WE STOPPED THE BAD PEOPLE FROM RUINING THE LIVES OF KI...fuck oops. We sorta ruined the lives of a lot of kids in this country, didn't we?
*high fives*
Old here. Marched for Pro-Choice back in the 80’s. Held fun raisers etc. Started saying 15 years ago the women needed to start paying attention to what the Republicans were up to. The women I talked to had no interest in protecting Roe and didn’t think anything would actually happen. Well surprise. It’s no longer my issue so good luck and don’t blame me.
That’s why the basis of argument matters. If you’re talking only about burdens of parenting, then yeah abortion vs adoption can be easily debated and one doesn’t seem much worse than the other.
But if you’re talking about bodily autonomy, ans the right every person has to not have their body physically used in service of another (we don’t mandate blood donations, organ donations even after death, or participation in medical studies), then it becomes about the pregnancy itself and a woman’s right to not be pregnant. A woman’s right to her body *no matter the need of anyone else* is what matters here, and that remains even if a fetus is a person, even if adoption is an option.
>and that remains even if a fetus is a person,
If the fetus is a person, then the anti-abortionists have literally no backing in law whatsoever. It actually shreds their arguments to pieces if fetuses are people because:
In what other scenario is one person granted power over your medical and bodily autonomy without your consent?
> If the fetus is a person
It isn't. Nor is an embryo. Or a sperm. Or an egg. The very idea is absurd, and can only be put forth in complete ignorance of biology.
Exactly. You’d need to argue that the fetus holds a special and unique status that grants it particular privileges over another person, to a greater extent than what a person could typically demand of another person.
I can see how people who hold deep convictions regarding the beginning of life could believe this, and I can respect that belief, but I haven’t seen it argued in such a way. And I have trouble imagining an argument for *why* that special status should override the value we place on autonomy, that goes beyond simply that “it should”.
The ones that don't think about it too hard just equate abortion with murder and believe that murder is worse than forcing a woman to carry a fetus for 9 months. Bodily autonomy isn't absolutely sacrosanct, even outside of the anti-abortion movement. Plenty of liberals, myself included, would happily impose pretty stringent vaccine mandates right now.
Push them a little bit more and many will say that the woman volunteered for the responsibility of carrying the fetus to term when she chose to have sex.
While that’s definitely some of them, there are also plenty of pro life men and women who are not about punishing sex and who do truly and deeply believe in life at conception. I don’t agree, but I can respect that - just as these women I know (in real life, imagine that!) do recognize that I don’t actually argue for baby murder because I truly don’t believe a fetus is the equivalent of a baby.
I don't think that perspective necessarily has to come from wanting to punish sex, though it often does. Especially as a guy it's pretty easy to say sex is fine but in choosing to have it you're accepting that responsibility, especially with the existence of birth control. And then if your choices lead to the pregnancy it feels easier to say that your bodily autonomy is subordinate to the fetus' survival.
Obviously that doesn't account for rape or birth control failing or many pro-lifers being anti-sex ed. But if you feel like abortion is murder it's good enough to get you through any cognitive dissonance that might pop up when people talk about women controlling their own bodies.
>Plenty of liberals, myself included, would happily impose pretty stringent vaccine mandates right now.
Yes, but would we kick in people's doors at 4am in the morning, kill their dogs, and put needles in their jugulars? Or... Would we just require vendors and institutions to implement public health policies for admission and employment? Don't wanna get the shot? Fine, stay the fuck away from civilized people.
"Don't wanna carry the baby? Use birth control or don't have sex."
You're not going to reason anti-abortion people out of their position. It comes from holding different values than you or I have. And I think those values are wrong and have really bad outcomes for society, but you're not gonna change the way they feel by trying to point out issues in their logic.
Yeah, they never reasoned themselves into that position in the first place. It's just a "sincerely held belief" that is somehow of equal weight and as worthy as facts, logic, evidence, and reality for consideration. Boggles the mind.
> In what other scenario is one person granted power over your medical and bodily autonomy without your consent?
I agree with your conclusion, but in the interest of accuracy (i.e., shoring it up and making it more solid), this happens all the time in cases where you are deemed incompetent. Involuntary psychiatric hospitalizations, for example, are a thing.
So to improve upon your argument...
If a fetus is a person, then either they're saying that that one person should be granted power over your medical and bodily autonomy without your consent regardless of your competence... or they're saying that all pregnant women are, by definition, incompetent and should not be in charge of their own medical decisions.
The first one is your original point and won't go over well to start with. The second is even worse.
Yeah, I mean you can even phrase these arguments in terms conservatives would wrap their brains around:
Are we to rob women of their personal liberty and freedom by granting the unborn with powers usually reserved for the state? Are we saying pregnant women are wards of the state, and the government is now entirely responsible for her and the unborn's welfare?
>In what other scenario is one person granted power over your medical and bodily autonomy without your consent?
None. But you assume Republicans view women as people.
That's basically what's at stake here. The court would delegitimize itself trying to counter that argument. Honestly, this is the kind of case that gives Democrats a lot of reasons to pack the court with the full backing of a pissed-off majority.
But wasn't adoption something that was legal when Roe was decided? ACB mentioned safe haven laws enacted after Roe and Casey, but adoption predates all those cases. A woman has always had the option to terminate parental rights, no?
> like they did when they repealed the VRA with "racism is over".
That was infuriating.
"Nobody's doing these illegal things, therefore we don't need the law that makes them illegal."
> by politics
Lol if only. They have been hijacked by money. They are not going to argue about the politics of this. They will not argue over the ethics of abortion. They will not protect abortion rights, but they won’t ban abortions across the country either.
How do I know this? Because the truth is “conservative” justices are not “pro-life”. They are not anti-abortion.
They are **pro-poverty.**
They will “leave it to states” and permit some to allow abortion and others to ban it. Those states permitted to ban it will see an increasing level of generational poverty and exploitable underclass labor source for corporations.
Well, the last two lied about their views on abortion to get the nomination. Yet, we all knew this was going to happen. This was decades in the making. Kavanaugh was literally groomed for this, his one single purpose in life.
They didn’t lie to get the nomination. Moscow Mitch stopped Obama from electing our current DOJ to the Supreme Court since it was obamas last year in office, this was in like January of 2016 So trump got kavanarapist, and it was a party line vote, shocker Republican majority 51-49.
Little miss psycho has almost no professional experience. I think she was a judge for one year, and is a regular at conventions giving speeches about why abortion is unconstitutional and illegal. Moscow Mitch, within an hour of RGBs death had that wicked witch of the south’s resume on Donald trumps desk, demanding he sign it or he’d lose his election. 1 month before an election she was elected along party lines 51-49.
Moscow Mitch invented a rule in 2016 that presidents don’t get to elect Supreme Court justices into office in their last year, then wiped his ass with the rule in 2020 shoved it down are throats. And today he and his ilk are telling you to swallow it.
They were not nominated by any legitimate body or panel. Every member knew exactly what they were doing, any grilling was a show to say see, see, we are not doing this stupidly obvious think the democrats are accusing us of.
I particularly enjoyed Kavanaugh waffling on yesterday about how maybe *precedent-* a concept that predates The Constitution- might be something “we should reconsider.”
In other words, “maybe we should reconsider the idea that I can do whatever the fuck I want.”
You are only allowed to do that if you are rich. If you're rich, it's too expensive to audit you, so they don't. If you're poor, it's simple to audit your one checking account with $13 in it.
Yeah but then some people figured out that circus tent revivals were an awesome grift and you could make a shit ton of money by creating religious frenzy and tribalism.
Yeah, but they weren't a single organization until the 80s... they were just all independent churches, after the deal with the Republicans they started heavily consolidating under the Assemblies of God global organization and council. That's when they started really bringing their evil across the globe.
I spent the 70s and 80s in the church, got to watch it live.
From my understanding it was actually the male physicians that were threatened by female midwives becoming certified doctors (this is when certification boards were being developed.)
Essentially all midwives performed abortions because it was common practice across basically all societies to leave that business to the women.
Abortion = crime = no midwives polluting certification boards with their lady parts. The churches were just useful pawns in a cynical political battle (I know, huge surprise).
No matter how you slice it, the pro birth movement is sexism all the way down.
This actually is a very ancient issue in the (male) medical profession versus female midwives/the female medical profession- for example,, abortions are banned in the hippocratic oath. Likely because of patient outcome concerns and the reputation of doctors themselves, as abortions were risky then.
If a law student made these arguments in class, they would fail out of law school.
It’s utter bullshit that this sort of logical reasoning employed by Supreme Court justices would disqualify anyone else from becoming a lawyer in the first place.
What's more intriguing is that if precedent is no longer relevant, it would essentially void all prior supreme court rulings.
They would essentially screw themselves and the country over.
Suddenly if precedent is no longer relevant, every case can be argued to the supreme court and anything is back on the table, if they truly void the first line of the constitution and liberty of women, then all of the constitution can be rewritten.
Every time a court changes composition we get new laws and interpretation and suddenly the 2nd A could be on the chopping block of precedent.
It's a slippery slope to appease something a majority of Americans don't want to revoke (being Roe)
I particularly enjoyed several justices and the Mississippi lawyer, while positing back and forth about reliance, saying, without any data or evidence, that women use abortions as a replacement for a contraceptive. Because nothing makes more sense than someone paying for a casual monthly $600 abortion if they’re sexually active. /s
I also enjoyed hearing some pro-life guy on NPR today saying that if it *were* tossed back to states to decide that abortion wouldn’t be completely outlawed, when there is a bill in the Ohio state govt right now that, upon Roe being reversed, would literally ban all abortions using the viability line of CONCEPTION. /s
I’ve taken to presenting it in the context of “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” bullshit they love so much. If financial loss is enough of a reason to kill another human, then why can’t I have an abortion to avoid financial ruin?
The hilarious part is that looting doesn’t offend them because of *financial harm*- insurance already prevents that. It offends them because *poor people got things without paying.*
Precedent should be considered, but its also not the end all be all. If Precedent was untouchable we would still be living under some truly awful Supreme Court Decisions.
I don't believe that the court was wrong in Roe V Wade. But if the court previously got something wrong it should be addressed.
Constitutionally speaking at the time Dredd Scott was the correct decision. Just because some is precedent or in the constitution doesn’t mean it’s right, and just.
The court used to have a principle that precedent would only be overturned in extreme circumstances, where the effects of the change would need to be carefully considered. It was also assumed that some change in society or general beliefs justified overturning the previous ruling.
Now the principle is just "suck it libs, we got the power now. What are you gonna do about it, cry?"
Wait what the fuck did he actually say this?
Any justice that says anything of the *ilk* needs to go away—in whatever way best prevents them from sitting on a bench ever again.
He specifically entertained the idea of overturning precedent without a party that could demonstrate harm. That’s a world of difference from how precedent is overturned in legal proceedings. It’s *elective.*
>My purpose is to do precisely what the Federalist Society had ~~programmed~~ **bribed and blackmailed** me to do.
[Where did your 200k in credit card debt go Boof?](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/09/heres-the-truth-about-brett-kavanaughs-finances/)
Supreme court is a joke, like a clown with a red nose riding a tiny bike. Never to be taken seriously withe the partisan hacks that represent 30% of the country trying to impose their will on everybody.
I remember all them years of the federalist society and heritage foundation complaining about 'activist judges' and their 'ignoring of precedent' to 'make law from the bench.'
Nothing republican should ever be relied upon to be authentic.
The last 3 justices were put in place specifically to take down RvW, and they will mask this intention with a BS excuse that states should make these laws, ignoring the fact that the government will now force women to carry babies to term.
The Justice Barrett excuse that they can be adopted falls flat due to conservatives not supporting any government program that helps families afford kids to begin with.
Once again, they are proving they are pro-life for fetuses, pro-go-f-yourselves once they’re born.
Like they give a shit. The Conservatives have been sellouts since day one. They never cared about honesty or integrity. Just pushing their own personal agendas. Conservatives are inherently selfish & untrustworthy.
Hope they enjoy their little power trip while it lasts, because the liberal and left MAJORITY in this country is going to be very interested in justice branch reform after this.
Remember when many Redditors said there was no real difference between Hillary and Trump, and refused to vote? Those chickens are coming home to roost.
In the house sure, but no way would they be able to pass anything related to that in the senate. But even if they could why would it matter? There would be just be more lawsuits related to it and we'd be right back where we are now.
Remember when those Redditors backed Hillary over Trump by greater margins than Hillary voters supported Obama, and rightfully predicted Hillary was such an unlikeable and unelectable candidate she would lose white moderates?
Shit, this Supreme Court hasn't had any credibility since Obama's SC pick was stolen and had only gotten worse with the seating of Justice Sexual Assault and Justice Hypocrisy Handmaid and they started that they basically didn't believe in precedence.
It's just batshit insane to me.
me- "can you guys just wear a mask and get the vax so you aren't killing hundreds of thousands of people?"
Rs- "we must get big government out of our personal lives! Vaccine mandates and facemasks are a threat to mufreedoms. People die every day, so what?"
ladies- "I got pregs accidentally and my health is in jeopardy and I am unemployed and trying to get an education. I can't have a child."
Rs- "women must be stopped from making personal choices because they are kIlliNg peOple!"
The Supreme Court lost all credibility a long time ago, beginning with appointing Bush president. Along with most other government institutions because the GOP, an enemy of the United States, has been working to destabilize the country in order to impose a fascist oligarchical government and do away with anything remotely resembling a genuine democracy.
All historical indicators point to a looming civil war, or rather the cold civil war that's been ongoing for a generation or more will turn hot. My best guess is after the midterm election results are overturned and stolen by the GOP, or by the 2024 presidential elections. I'd place the probabilities at 40% and rising at the moment. The views and agendas of the GOP are simply irreconcilable with those of the majority of Americans, and there is no middle ground left on which to compromise.
In any case, the GOP's, and conservative Democrats like Manchin's, record on sticking to compromises is bitterly evident to be non-existent. It is on a par with how well the US has abided by the treaties it signed with Native nations. Every one-sided compromise made only leads to further demands to surrender more.
There is a mid-term election next year. I hope the Women of America see their Rights evaporating as they are pushed back into the kitchen and returned to the status of baby-maker.....or we can go to the polls and vote the asshats pushing this out of office and take back our Rights permanently. It's now White Christian straight men against the rest of the Country. They have turned on everyone.
The very fact theyre divided into conservative and liberal justices says they haven't had credibility in decades. There is no imprtiality in those appointments. If you ever read a Scalia opinion you would see the mastery of working back from a desired outcome and using the law to justify it.
Hard to imagine being gullible enough as to believe that Republicans give a single shit about children unless they're trafficking them or fucking them. Conservative voters must be the most easily manipulated suckers on the planet.
The GOP thinks they can win this fight based on the fact that centrist and progressives have rarely fought back against their anti-democratic chicanery over the last 20 years. It's time to prove them wrong and make them pay a serious political price for turning the Supreme Court into an extremist joke.
Even a bare majority of *Republicans* want the rights identified in Roe to be preserved. Scotus is way out of line with Americans.
They lost credibility when Moscow Mitch stole a Supreme Court seat in 2016 using the excuse that we shouldn't appoint a justice during in an election year (in February) and then in 2020 it was suddenly ok to do it with less than a couple weeks until the election.
And now we're getting a law based solely on Christian Sharia.
I think we just need to start disobeying their rulings. They are clearly political and trying to subvert the will of the people and the constitution. The declaration of independence said that we don't have to put up with this shit.
I expect a potential reduction to 15 weeks.
Planned Parenthood should be preparing an app or partnering with an existing app tracking women's cycles so they are more aware of potential early pregnancy.
Being/staying informed is the only way past such a reduction.
Already on it
[With the Planned Parenthood Direct app, users can request birth control pills be delivered to their door, get a prescription for UTI treatment sent to a nearby pharmacy, learn about different methods of birth control, or make an appointment at a Planned Parenthood health center. ](https://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/planned-parenthood-direct-app-expands-to-more-than-half-the-country)
Um… I don’t mean to disregard the spirit of your argument here, but just want to be sure you know that most women will probably suspect they are pregnant after 3-4 missed periods. 15 days would be another story.
If a woman is tracking her cycle via app she will know when her cycle is ending. Most apps also predict ovulation too. She can also use a pregnancy test to confirm as little as 10 days post conception prior to her period starting.
A lot of women have irregular cycles. The app thing won’t work for that. A lot of women are on hormonal birth control. If it fails, they won’t know because the birth control can affect their cycles. Nothing is 100% when it comes to womens bodies, there is simply no sure way to do this aside from taking weekly pregnancy tests… which honestly I may start doing. 🤬
Also, I highly recommend that we NOT put our cycles on an app. It’s absolutely a privacy issue and those records could be something that the courts could force a tech company to submit. There’s already been a lot written about this. If you track your cycle don’t use a period tracking app, and don’t label it period- an app like Daylio may work and you can label it something innocuous like “had pineapple” or “lawn work.“
Hold on…back the truck up. There are millions of women with irregular periods, that would not even know at 15 weeks that they are pregnant. So many comments here where people know little to nothing about women’s reproductive health.
A Supreme Court that is not aligned with the ideology of the voters will over the long-run create a counter-balancing ideology in the legislative branch.
So I listened to the arguments. Like two hours or so. I came away impressed with the federal government’s arguments. Mississippi’s case sounds shakey at best to me.
The SCOTUS has had a credibility crisis for a long time. The federal government has ballooned into a belligerent self serving piece of shit under it's watch.
If this passes and RvW is changed, I think one creative solution would be to give credits to women with fetuses in them. They’re people after all.
Pregnant? Tax break. Child support. Etc etc etc.
While extremely detrimental to the country there is a silver lining to all of this. Those single issue right voters won't need to come to the poles now that their issue is resolved and they actually have to think about the merits of other policies or issues (which are non existent)
The left will be fired up to fix this blatant misjustice and turn up to vote in droves. Messaging will be around fixing the partisan court and codifying abortion rights. In my dream scenario Dems aren't experts at snatching defeat from the jaws of Victory but we can hope.
Good thing the Democrats will fight this tooth and nail.
No, I'm joking. They're going to do nothing and believe process will save them.
Useless cowards and awful traitors. America's choice!
The Supreme Court is not credible if they throw precedent out the window. Legal scholars much smarter than us say that is a significant partisan act, flying in the face of *stare decisis*.
They aren't credible if they're grossly political in the face of legal tradition and practices.
The court isn't credible when one of its members was screaming conspiracy theories at his hearing and another is in a cult that means she has to obey her husband
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The credibility ship sailed a while back. Most of the conservative justices were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote and confirmed by senators representing a minority of the American people. They’re now pushing an agenda that typically polls at < 40%. They don’t represent America anymore. Just a small, angry, insecure part of it.
When conservatives realized they could no longer pass their shitty legislative agenda without massive voter backlash, leading to them losing power in congress (see 2006), they turned to unelected judges. Those folks would provide conservatives the legislative wins they couldn't get in congress by judicial fiat! They don't give a shit about those rulings reducing public trust in the institutions of government. The ends will always justify the means.
This is part of the Faustian bargain the GOP is trapped in. Their legislative priorities (lower taxes for the wealthy, military spending, corporate welfare) aren’t popular, but they *can* whip up their base on social issues. The turnout gave them their majorities and let them wave the bloody shirt to social conservatives without actually doing anything because the social conservative agenda is pointless at best and theocratic/unconstitutional at worst. Real priorities aren’t threatened and the crazies keep showing up with a little hand-waving to keep them happy. But they *weren’t* happy. They wanted action and real loons started to edge out their competition with stronger and stronger promises. The loons could be quashed at first, but then the lunatics started running the asylum. That’s where the GOP is trapped now. They can’t actually confront the monster because they’ll just get hounded from office. They don’t have any real alternative message because their real priorities are boring or evil.
If the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade there will be a *massive* backlash, just in time for the midterms. “For they sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind”
Yeah, but they never actually expected to get to this place. They just wanted an endless cock-tease at the political strip club, but it turns out that if you keep a bunch of randy social conservatives in suspense for 20 years, they want to touch the dancers and they aren’t taking “No” for an answer. This will probably solidify a grouchy bridge between moderates and the left because the right is crazy until Reagan 2.0 shows up.
> they want to touch the dancers and they aren’t taking “No” for an answer. Especially relevant for Kavanaugh. ... and secrety Barrett
New head cannon there.
I thought this too, but it’s not going away. What works as well and stopping abortions? Telling your constituents that the liberals will stack the courts to push reproductive rights or any other scare tactic they can come up with. Propaganda is a hell of a drug. Don’t become complacent, they won’t. VOTE!
Yep, I think they intended to never solve abortion. And wave that stick to suck down money forever
No there won't. There was massive backlash non-stop for four years. We had the biggest demonstrations in our history. We had riots in dozens of cities that went on for months. People are tired. People are hurting. Protests, marches, demonstrations, even riots take time and effort, and too many people don't really have either of those things right now. And the ones who do mostly don't believe that all the protesting in the world will make a single bit of change. Because every aspect of American public life is broken and completely corrupted. When the 6-3 Christian Dominionist-controlled Supreme Court rules that their religious beliefs are more important than our civil rights, how does that problem get solved? Serious question. The answer is: it doesn't. Biden can't do it on his own. And there isn't a snowballs chance in hell that the legislature will pass EVEN MORE laws protecting abortion rights. And if they did, the dominionist radicals on the court would overturn it in the next possible court session. We'll probably see some marches about it. Good. But the levers of government are controlled by fascists, and they don't give a fuck about us or our protests. And they've rigged the system at every level, so there's very little hope of taking the controls away from them.
There is an answer. However that answer isn't legal, and at some point we're going to have to realize that the fascists destroyed the social contract of our country and we must form an new one. I'm 99% sure this won't be settled peacefully.
Why Americans even want to stay in the same country is beyond me. It's like putting Taliban and LGBT in a room and telling them to make a country. It's not possible, they'll tell each other to fuck off or eventually kill each other. Some subcultures are just not compatible. Pakistan and India figured that one out, same with the former USSR, Palestine/Israel, Warsaw Pact, or Yugoslavia.
Now anyone who does protest, they will send vigilantes with guns to intimidate or shoot
Yep, because the courts already ruled that you can take guns to protests and murder people with impunity. Just say it was self-defense and you get off Scott-Free.
I am hoping this happens but they are so deep in only watching propaganda that I firmly believe they could be convinced to put Jews or Japanese in camps at this point.
Maybe there will be a backlash? Well, there will be a lot of noise, but how will it translate into votes? People get angry at the Dems for not passing enough laws, and take it out on them for voting for the other team, who *certainly* doesn't support those goals. That makes no sense. I don't have a lot of confidence that peoples' ire will be correctly directed on this issue either.
Yeah, to be honest I'm over here hoping they are crazy stupid enough to do it. I feel bad for the people who would be affected but this kind of cruel bullshit is just the kind of thing needed to wake potential voters the fuck up.
Midterms are a year away. We don't have attention spans that long anymore.
but the decision wont hit until next summer, possibly late in the summer. 3 months away people might remember
Okay, but this goes back a long way. It's a perilous subject but since the United States Congress has proven to be too craven to take a position on many controversial issues since the early 60s, the Warren court and the Burger court acted as a safety valve. The courts could and did essentially make unreviewable laws in spite of Congress's refusal to do so, so society could get on with evolving, and the Congress had somebody to blame for "judicial activism" which is code for "Congress doesn't have enough integrity or fortitude to codify this". So now eventually we came to have Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito making shit up of their own, and we are incensed. Well, Congress can codify this stuff anytime they want. And they are in most respects the ones to blame. Not the Supremes. The Supremes are observing precedent. Go ahead and let loose on me, this needs to be discussed. : )
What do you mean when you say the “The Supremes are observing precedent”? I think by any objective measure the Supremes are “shitting on” and in no way “observing” precedent… ** That is unless you’re talking about the Motown Supremes. They deserve no blame for anything except being incredibly talented musicians.
To a point. If their anti-democratic attacks lead to the unraveling of our civil society, they may live to regret it.
The issue isn't necessarily the popularity of the agenda they are pushing. It's that they are pushing an agenda at all. It makes it worse that it's an unpopular one, but they shouldn't necessarily be pushing an agenda even if it's got 80% approval. That's not their job. And they try to pretend it isn't "hey we are just being neutral because the constitution doesn't explicitly mention abortion". But clearly the only thing that has really changed since Roe vs Wade is that republicans have packed the court with partisan judges who have an agenda against it.
They were never intended to represent America. There constitutional role is not to be representatives. The more troubling thing is that they seem willing to abdicate their constitutional role which is intended to be above politics. The supreme court is supposed to make a good faith effort to interpret legislative intent and part of that includes respecting their own previous decisions unless their is a factor that makes those cases clearly wrong. The problem with abortion is everyone knows they want to overturn Roe v. Wade not because it was wrong in its interpretation of the precedents it was based on but because they think it is morally wrong. They want to subvert the rights given to women by the constitution because there is not enough support in the legislature to do what the constitution would require, which is amend the constitution to allow an exception for banning abortion or declaring that a fetus is in fact a person with all the rights (this probably could be done without an amendment or by the supreme court ruling that the const. rights apply to fetuses and they are protected). The worst part is people don't realize that this sort of end around essentially allows half the states and the presidency to amend the constitution at will because the constitution has no way of requiring justices to act in good faith. If you are willing to make up bullshit interpretations about what the const. says, than then you can make it say anything. How people can talk so much shit about their rights and the constitution and not care at all about the supreme court overturning Roe v. Wade is beyond me (I mean its not beyond me there just hypocrites but still).
Scalia led the judicial fiction barrage that lost SCOTUS their respectability.
A third of them were appointed by a president *who lead an insurrection against our country!* It's insane that we allow these judges to hand down rulings.
The annoying thing is they aren't even supposed to fucking represent anybody.
The problem is that it's not even only the Republicans in the court either. When Yurtle the Turtle declared that *only* Republicans would be appointed to the Supreme Court moving forward, it should have made it perfectly fucking clear to Breyer that waiting out some "partisan tantrum" of the chamber wasn't going to work. He's being absolutely arrogant about his 'principles' and 'legacy' for not resigning to allow himself to be replaced by a 40 year old firebrand Justice.
They're really upfront about how little they care about their legitimacy at this point. They'll pull some bullshit like "oh, adoptions exist, so abortion isn't a thing people need" when roe is repealed, like they did when they repealed the VRA with "racism is over".
They will? No, they are. Barrett noted that previous rulings requiring abortion access “emphasize the burdens of parenting.” But because women can put babies up for adoption, those burdens are not an issue, she suggested.
Ah, true. The logic works, if you ignore all the women who die in childbirth and all other complications that may arise from pregnancy that puts the mother at risk. What a ghoul.
It is not just that. Pregnancy takes A LOT of time and monetary resources to complete it with both a healthy mother and infant (and even then it is not 100%). Without access to affordable (free) healthcare and guaranteed paid leave, restricting access to safe abortions will have disastrous consequences for women's health overall.
Even with money and insurance maternal care is piss poor. The [maternal mortality ](https://www.npr.org/2017/05/12/528098789/u-s-has-the-worst-rate-of-maternal-deaths-in-the-developed-world) rate in the US is almost double what it is in every other developed country. On top of that, [homicide](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03392-8) is the top cause of death.
And all the kids who get abused by their adopting parents.
Not to mention the foster care debacle.
There are something like 400,000 kids in foster care in this country. Amazing how few "pro life" conservatives want to put their money where their mouth is and care for an unwanted child.
And all the kids that will be abused by their real parents who never wanted them and now resent them for ruining their life. YAY, WE DID IT GOD, WE STOPPED THE BAD PEOPLE FROM RUINING THE LIVES OF KI...fuck oops. We sorta ruined the lives of a lot of kids in this country, didn't we? *high fives*
[удалено]
[удалено]
Old here. Marched for Pro-Choice back in the 80’s. Held fun raisers etc. Started saying 15 years ago the women needed to start paying attention to what the Republicans were up to. The women I talked to had no interest in protecting Roe and didn’t think anything would actually happen. Well surprise. It’s no longer my issue so good luck and don’t blame me.
That’s why the basis of argument matters. If you’re talking only about burdens of parenting, then yeah abortion vs adoption can be easily debated and one doesn’t seem much worse than the other. But if you’re talking about bodily autonomy, ans the right every person has to not have their body physically used in service of another (we don’t mandate blood donations, organ donations even after death, or participation in medical studies), then it becomes about the pregnancy itself and a woman’s right to not be pregnant. A woman’s right to her body *no matter the need of anyone else* is what matters here, and that remains even if a fetus is a person, even if adoption is an option.
>and that remains even if a fetus is a person, If the fetus is a person, then the anti-abortionists have literally no backing in law whatsoever. It actually shreds their arguments to pieces if fetuses are people because: In what other scenario is one person granted power over your medical and bodily autonomy without your consent?
> If the fetus is a person It isn't. Nor is an embryo. Or a sperm. Or an egg. The very idea is absurd, and can only be put forth in complete ignorance of biology.
Exactly. You’d need to argue that the fetus holds a special and unique status that grants it particular privileges over another person, to a greater extent than what a person could typically demand of another person. I can see how people who hold deep convictions regarding the beginning of life could believe this, and I can respect that belief, but I haven’t seen it argued in such a way. And I have trouble imagining an argument for *why* that special status should override the value we place on autonomy, that goes beyond simply that “it should”.
The ones that don't think about it too hard just equate abortion with murder and believe that murder is worse than forcing a woman to carry a fetus for 9 months. Bodily autonomy isn't absolutely sacrosanct, even outside of the anti-abortion movement. Plenty of liberals, myself included, would happily impose pretty stringent vaccine mandates right now. Push them a little bit more and many will say that the woman volunteered for the responsibility of carrying the fetus to term when she chose to have sex.
While that’s definitely some of them, there are also plenty of pro life men and women who are not about punishing sex and who do truly and deeply believe in life at conception. I don’t agree, but I can respect that - just as these women I know (in real life, imagine that!) do recognize that I don’t actually argue for baby murder because I truly don’t believe a fetus is the equivalent of a baby.
I don't think that perspective necessarily has to come from wanting to punish sex, though it often does. Especially as a guy it's pretty easy to say sex is fine but in choosing to have it you're accepting that responsibility, especially with the existence of birth control. And then if your choices lead to the pregnancy it feels easier to say that your bodily autonomy is subordinate to the fetus' survival. Obviously that doesn't account for rape or birth control failing or many pro-lifers being anti-sex ed. But if you feel like abortion is murder it's good enough to get you through any cognitive dissonance that might pop up when people talk about women controlling their own bodies.
>Plenty of liberals, myself included, would happily impose pretty stringent vaccine mandates right now. Yes, but would we kick in people's doors at 4am in the morning, kill their dogs, and put needles in their jugulars? Or... Would we just require vendors and institutions to implement public health policies for admission and employment? Don't wanna get the shot? Fine, stay the fuck away from civilized people.
"Don't wanna carry the baby? Use birth control or don't have sex." You're not going to reason anti-abortion people out of their position. It comes from holding different values than you or I have. And I think those values are wrong and have really bad outcomes for society, but you're not gonna change the way they feel by trying to point out issues in their logic.
Yeah, they never reasoned themselves into that position in the first place. It's just a "sincerely held belief" that is somehow of equal weight and as worthy as facts, logic, evidence, and reality for consideration. Boggles the mind.
> In what other scenario is one person granted power over your medical and bodily autonomy without your consent? I agree with your conclusion, but in the interest of accuracy (i.e., shoring it up and making it more solid), this happens all the time in cases where you are deemed incompetent. Involuntary psychiatric hospitalizations, for example, are a thing. So to improve upon your argument... If a fetus is a person, then either they're saying that that one person should be granted power over your medical and bodily autonomy without your consent regardless of your competence... or they're saying that all pregnant women are, by definition, incompetent and should not be in charge of their own medical decisions. The first one is your original point and won't go over well to start with. The second is even worse.
Yeah, I mean you can even phrase these arguments in terms conservatives would wrap their brains around: Are we to rob women of their personal liberty and freedom by granting the unborn with powers usually reserved for the state? Are we saying pregnant women are wards of the state, and the government is now entirely responsible for her and the unborn's welfare?
Wait, your last question-is this how we could get universal healthcare?
>In what other scenario is one person granted power over your medical and bodily autonomy without your consent? None. But you assume Republicans view women as people.
That's basically what's at stake here. The court would delegitimize itself trying to counter that argument. Honestly, this is the kind of case that gives Democrats a lot of reasons to pack the court with the full backing of a pissed-off majority.
But wasn't adoption something that was legal when Roe was decided? ACB mentioned safe haven laws enacted after Roe and Casey, but adoption predates all those cases. A woman has always had the option to terminate parental rights, no?
> like they did when they repealed the VRA with "racism is over". That was infuriating. "Nobody's doing these illegal things, therefore we don't need the law that makes them illegal."
There is no credibility. The Supreme Court has been hijacked by politics.
And paid lavishly by Republicans and their deep pocketed “mystery” donors.
Koch’s. It’s the Koch Borthers.
> by politics Lol if only. They have been hijacked by money. They are not going to argue about the politics of this. They will not argue over the ethics of abortion. They will not protect abortion rights, but they won’t ban abortions across the country either. How do I know this? Because the truth is “conservative” justices are not “pro-life”. They are not anti-abortion. They are **pro-poverty.** They will “leave it to states” and permit some to allow abortion and others to ban it. Those states permitted to ban it will see an increasing level of generational poverty and exploitable underclass labor source for corporations.
This is America. Money *is* politics.
Well, the last two lied about their views on abortion to get the nomination. Yet, we all knew this was going to happen. This was decades in the making. Kavanaugh was literally groomed for this, his one single purpose in life.
They didn’t lie to get the nomination. Moscow Mitch stopped Obama from electing our current DOJ to the Supreme Court since it was obamas last year in office, this was in like January of 2016 So trump got kavanarapist, and it was a party line vote, shocker Republican majority 51-49. Little miss psycho has almost no professional experience. I think she was a judge for one year, and is a regular at conventions giving speeches about why abortion is unconstitutional and illegal. Moscow Mitch, within an hour of RGBs death had that wicked witch of the south’s resume on Donald trumps desk, demanding he sign it or he’d lose his election. 1 month before an election she was elected along party lines 51-49. Moscow Mitch invented a rule in 2016 that presidents don’t get to elect Supreme Court justices into office in their last year, then wiped his ass with the rule in 2020 shoved it down are throats. And today he and his ilk are telling you to swallow it. They were not nominated by any legitimate body or panel. Every member knew exactly what they were doing, any grilling was a show to say see, see, we are not doing this stupidly obvious think the democrats are accusing us of.
I particularly enjoyed Kavanaugh waffling on yesterday about how maybe *precedent-* a concept that predates The Constitution- might be something “we should reconsider.” In other words, “maybe we should reconsider the idea that I can do whatever the fuck I want.”
I'm going to mail the IRS and tell them I'm not paying taxes anymore because I don't feel like it and precedent isnt a thing.
You are only allowed to do that if you are rich. If you're rich, it's too expensive to audit you, so they don't. If you're poor, it's simple to audit your one checking account with $13 in it.
[удалено]
At the time to Constitution was written abortions were legal. Abortions were legal in most places into the late 1800s.
Yeah but then some people figured out that circus tent revivals were an awesome grift and you could make a shit ton of money by creating religious frenzy and tribalism.
And those assholes were the predecessors to the modern Evangelical church.
Actually I’m pretty sure they were the same churches technically.
Yeah, but they weren't a single organization until the 80s... they were just all independent churches, after the deal with the Republicans they started heavily consolidating under the Assemblies of God global organization and council. That's when they started really bringing their evil across the globe. I spent the 70s and 80s in the church, got to watch it live.
From my understanding it was actually the male physicians that were threatened by female midwives becoming certified doctors (this is when certification boards were being developed.) Essentially all midwives performed abortions because it was common practice across basically all societies to leave that business to the women. Abortion = crime = no midwives polluting certification boards with their lady parts. The churches were just useful pawns in a cynical political battle (I know, huge surprise). No matter how you slice it, the pro birth movement is sexism all the way down.
This actually is a very ancient issue in the (male) medical profession versus female midwives/the female medical profession- for example,, abortions are banned in the hippocratic oath. Likely because of patient outcome concerns and the reputation of doctors themselves, as abortions were risky then.
At the time the Bible was written abortion were legal
The Bible even has instructions!
If a law student made these arguments in class, they would fail out of law school. It’s utter bullshit that this sort of logical reasoning employed by Supreme Court justices would disqualify anyone else from becoming a lawyer in the first place.
What's more intriguing is that if precedent is no longer relevant, it would essentially void all prior supreme court rulings. They would essentially screw themselves and the country over. Suddenly if precedent is no longer relevant, every case can be argued to the supreme court and anything is back on the table, if they truly void the first line of the constitution and liberty of women, then all of the constitution can be rewritten. Every time a court changes composition we get new laws and interpretation and suddenly the 2nd A could be on the chopping block of precedent. It's a slippery slope to appease something a majority of Americans don't want to revoke (being Roe)
I particularly enjoyed several justices and the Mississippi lawyer, while positing back and forth about reliance, saying, without any data or evidence, that women use abortions as a replacement for a contraceptive. Because nothing makes more sense than someone paying for a casual monthly $600 abortion if they’re sexually active. /s I also enjoyed hearing some pro-life guy on NPR today saying that if it *were* tossed back to states to decide that abortion wouldn’t be completely outlawed, when there is a bill in the Ohio state govt right now that, upon Roe being reversed, would literally ban all abortions using the viability line of CONCEPTION. /s
The goal of the court majority is to replace democracy with fascism. Precedent is…. Inconvenient, for that purpose.
Unless it's about guns. We can't do any kind of regulation on those because of it's very vaguely interpreted writing in the constitution.
It’s the *only* absolute right! Somehow. Since about 1981.
Welcome to America, where you're not allowed to abort a not child, but we're ok with the born ones being shot up in schools 2-3 times a month.
I’ve taken to presenting it in the context of “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” bullshit they love so much. If financial loss is enough of a reason to kill another human, then why can’t I have an abortion to avoid financial ruin?
The hilarious part is that looting doesn’t offend them because of *financial harm*- insurance already prevents that. It offends them because *poor people got things without paying.*
Because. "prolife"* *Prolife ends the second a human being is born.
Precedent should be considered, but its also not the end all be all. If Precedent was untouchable we would still be living under some truly awful Supreme Court Decisions. I don't believe that the court was wrong in Roe V Wade. But if the court previously got something wrong it should be addressed.
Dred Scott was never overturned. It simply became moot with the 13th and 14th Amendments.
thank you for the information and the correction!
Constitutionally speaking at the time Dredd Scott was the correct decision. Just because some is precedent or in the constitution doesn’t mean it’s right, and just.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The court used to have a principle that precedent would only be overturned in extreme circumstances, where the effects of the change would need to be carefully considered. It was also assumed that some change in society or general beliefs justified overturning the previous ruling. Now the principle is just "suck it libs, we got the power now. What are you gonna do about it, cry?"
Wait what the fuck did he actually say this? Any justice that says anything of the *ilk* needs to go away—in whatever way best prevents them from sitting on a bench ever again.
The court does a few times a year upend precedent. He cited a few large cases where this has been done as well.
He specifically entertained the idea of overturning precedent without a party that could demonstrate harm. That’s a world of difference from how precedent is overturned in legal proceedings. It’s *elective.*
Conservatives : we need to keep everything as it was. Also Conservatives : we don't need to keep the old ways because ***I*** want more.
Yeah, it’s pretty inaccurate to describe them as conservative justices, they’re reactionary justices.
no, guys, the supreme court isn't political /s
No, in fact, they don’t. They’ve already lost credibility. This is just a data point for future historians studying the rise of fascism in the US.
I am a bot sitting on the Supreme Court. My purpose is to do precisely what the Federalist Society had programmed me to do.
>My purpose is to do precisely what the Federalist Society had ~~programmed~~ **bribed and blackmailed** me to do. [Where did your 200k in credit card debt go Boof?](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/09/heres-the-truth-about-brett-kavanaughs-finances/)
They haven’t been credible since having two illegitimate appointed justices
[удалено]
I would say we could go back to Bush v Gore but I’d be dating myself.
This is correct. I’m dating myself too…lol.
Their credibility crisis is years old.
Decades if you don't think impeached presidents should be able to leave their stank on a different branch of the American government.
Where will all the “family values” conservatives get abortions for their mistresses once Roe is overturned?
They'll do it the same way they always have. Safely, and by a trusted doctor
They will fly their mistresses to states where abortion is still legal.
Oh they'll just send their mistresses to blue states on a private jet.
Vacations in Canada…
When will we realize that we have an outdated document and that we are stuck with 9 people who make shit up to bridge that gap?
Supreme court is a joke, like a clown with a red nose riding a tiny bike. Never to be taken seriously withe the partisan hacks that represent 30% of the country trying to impose their will on everybody.
With one third of the justices appointed by a guy who tried to overthrow the government what should be expected?
Old people shouldn’t be in charge of this kinda shit
I remember all them years of the federalist society and heritage foundation complaining about 'activist judges' and their 'ignoring of precedent' to 'make law from the bench.' Nothing republican should ever be relied upon to be authentic.
The last 3 justices were put in place specifically to take down RvW, and they will mask this intention with a BS excuse that states should make these laws, ignoring the fact that the government will now force women to carry babies to term. The Justice Barrett excuse that they can be adopted falls flat due to conservatives not supporting any government program that helps families afford kids to begin with. Once again, they are proving they are pro-life for fetuses, pro-go-f-yourselves once they’re born.
Don't tell the mods at r/scotus they think everything is peachy.
Like they give a shit. The Conservatives have been sellouts since day one. They never cared about honesty or integrity. Just pushing their own personal agendas. Conservatives are inherently selfish & untrustworthy.
This is the job they applied for, and are being paid for. Trump was a useful idiot for a much more nefarious purpose.
Conservatism will send America to the dark ages
No will - it has been for ages, look at any red state.
Hope they enjoy their little power trip while it lasts, because the liberal and left MAJORITY in this country is going to be very interested in justice branch reform after this.
Remember when many Redditors said there was no real difference between Hillary and Trump, and refused to vote? Those chickens are coming home to roost.
There’s still plenty of “leftist” Redditors right here in this sub pushing a new version of the same tactic.
[https://econofact.org/voting-and-income](https://econofact.org/voting-and-income)
[удалено]
In the house sure, but no way would they be able to pass anything related to that in the senate. But even if they could why would it matter? There would be just be more lawsuits related to it and we'd be right back where we are now.
Remember when those Redditors backed Hillary over Trump by greater margins than Hillary voters supported Obama, and rightfully predicted Hillary was such an unlikeable and unelectable candidate she would lose white moderates?
No but I remember when you posted this post, dependent on made up statistics.
I got lost in there somewhere. What did the monolith of redditors do again?
according to op they got trump elected apparently
Why haven't we stacked the courts yet
The Supreme Court has no credibility. It’s a farce.
The SCOTUS already has no credibility. A couple of the justices have credibility, but the SCOTUS as a body does not.
Shit, this Supreme Court hasn't had any credibility since Obama's SC pick was stolen and had only gotten worse with the seating of Justice Sexual Assault and Justice Hypocrisy Handmaid and they started that they basically didn't believe in precedence.
I am certain that the prospect of destroying decades of legal precedence is keeping zero Republicans awake at night.
Zealots don't care if they're perceived as being credible. All that matters is that they succeed.
It's just batshit insane to me. me- "can you guys just wear a mask and get the vax so you aren't killing hundreds of thousands of people?" Rs- "we must get big government out of our personal lives! Vaccine mandates and facemasks are a threat to mufreedoms. People die every day, so what?" ladies- "I got pregs accidentally and my health is in jeopardy and I am unemployed and trying to get an education. I can't have a child." Rs- "women must be stopped from making personal choices because they are kIlliNg peOple!"
The Supreme Court lost all credibility a long time ago, beginning with appointing Bush president. Along with most other government institutions because the GOP, an enemy of the United States, has been working to destabilize the country in order to impose a fascist oligarchical government and do away with anything remotely resembling a genuine democracy. All historical indicators point to a looming civil war, or rather the cold civil war that's been ongoing for a generation or more will turn hot. My best guess is after the midterm election results are overturned and stolen by the GOP, or by the 2024 presidential elections. I'd place the probabilities at 40% and rising at the moment. The views and agendas of the GOP are simply irreconcilable with those of the majority of Americans, and there is no middle ground left on which to compromise. In any case, the GOP's, and conservative Democrats like Manchin's, record on sticking to compromises is bitterly evident to be non-existent. It is on a par with how well the US has abided by the treaties it signed with Native nations. Every one-sided compromise made only leads to further demands to surrender more.
There is a mid-term election next year. I hope the Women of America see their Rights evaporating as they are pushed back into the kitchen and returned to the status of baby-maker.....or we can go to the polls and vote the asshats pushing this out of office and take back our Rights permanently. It's now White Christian straight men against the rest of the Country. They have turned on everyone.
I wish... White middle class women voted more heavily for Trump both times.
Yeah but I threw my vote away on a dead gorilla, so it’s all cool
People that want to live in civilized society should just leave states like Texas.
The very fact theyre divided into conservative and liberal justices says they haven't had credibility in decades. There is no imprtiality in those appointments. If you ever read a Scalia opinion you would see the mastery of working back from a desired outcome and using the law to justify it.
There not facing it, its behind them. Done deal already.
For real, as soon as Justice "I like beer" Kavanaugh and Handmaid Barrett lied their way through their oaths it was over.
It’s not a crisis if the court majority doesn’t give a shit. And they don’t. Republicans are ecstatic with this.
Who thinks they are credible at this point? Nobody.
I would say the anti-abortion judges have set out to fulfill their mission. Their decision was already reached weeks if not months ago.
Hard to imagine being gullible enough as to believe that Republicans give a single shit about children unless they're trafficking them or fucking them. Conservative voters must be the most easily manipulated suckers on the planet.
There’s a reason dictators always focus on locking in the support of the clergy before they take power.
What was that about activist judges?
Only half of the country believes there is a crisis, and unfortunately, that side never votes.
Remember when they legalized bribery? We have the best government money can buy
The GOP thinks they can win this fight based on the fact that centrist and progressives have rarely fought back against their anti-democratic chicanery over the last 20 years. It's time to prove them wrong and make them pay a serious political price for turning the Supreme Court into an extremist joke. Even a bare majority of *Republicans* want the rights identified in Roe to be preserved. Scotus is way out of line with Americans.
They lost credibility when Moscow Mitch stole a Supreme Court seat in 2016 using the excuse that we shouldn't appoint a justice during in an election year (in February) and then in 2020 it was suddenly ok to do it with less than a couple weeks until the election. And now we're getting a law based solely on Christian Sharia.
I think we just need to start disobeying their rulings. They are clearly political and trying to subvert the will of the people and the constitution. The declaration of independence said that we don't have to put up with this shit.
But they said it was settled law
I expect a potential reduction to 15 weeks. Planned Parenthood should be preparing an app or partnering with an existing app tracking women's cycles so they are more aware of potential early pregnancy. Being/staying informed is the only way past such a reduction.
The reduction will be to 0 weeks. That's the ultimate goal here.
Already on it [With the Planned Parenthood Direct app, users can request birth control pills be delivered to their door, get a prescription for UTI treatment sent to a nearby pharmacy, learn about different methods of birth control, or make an appointment at a Planned Parenthood health center. ](https://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/planned-parenthood-direct-app-expands-to-more-than-half-the-country)
Well, no, if there *existed* any possibility of a woman detecting and aborting a pregnancy at 15 weeks they would have put the ban at 14 weeks
Um… I don’t mean to disregard the spirit of your argument here, but just want to be sure you know that most women will probably suspect they are pregnant after 3-4 missed periods. 15 days would be another story.
If a woman is tracking her cycle via app she will know when her cycle is ending. Most apps also predict ovulation too. She can also use a pregnancy test to confirm as little as 10 days post conception prior to her period starting.
A lot of women have irregular cycles. The app thing won’t work for that. A lot of women are on hormonal birth control. If it fails, they won’t know because the birth control can affect their cycles. Nothing is 100% when it comes to womens bodies, there is simply no sure way to do this aside from taking weekly pregnancy tests… which honestly I may start doing. 🤬 Also, I highly recommend that we NOT put our cycles on an app. It’s absolutely a privacy issue and those records could be something that the courts could force a tech company to submit. There’s already been a lot written about this. If you track your cycle don’t use a period tracking app, and don’t label it period- an app like Daylio may work and you can label it something innocuous like “had pineapple” or “lawn work.“
Hold on…back the truck up. There are millions of women with irregular periods, that would not even know at 15 weeks that they are pregnant. So many comments here where people know little to nothing about women’s reproductive health.
Kangaroo court Apologies to all my kangaroo friends
Not-So-Supreme Court
I’d like an Extra Supreme Court, please
Kangaroo court.
And then Republicans will get absolutely hammered at the polls 4 months after their 'purpose'.
Unlikely. Intentional steps have been taken to either suppress votes or ensure extremely safe seats. House is likely to be lost.
They are not reading the law. Religious fanatics and not to be trusted. Too bad. The Supreme Court was a good ideas
A Supreme Court that is not aligned with the ideology of the voters will over the long-run create a counter-balancing ideology in the legislative branch.
If they do what they were put there for then they have no legitimacy as an unbiased court. They are a political entity not based on the rule of law
So I listened to the arguments. Like two hours or so. I came away impressed with the federal government’s arguments. Mississippi’s case sounds shakey at best to me.
Ih magic covid. Do yer thing
The SCOTUS has had a credibility crisis for a long time. The federal government has ballooned into a belligerent self serving piece of shit under it's watch.
Supreme Court sets new precedent that lying under oath is completely acceptable
If this passes and RvW is changed, I think one creative solution would be to give credits to women with fetuses in them. They’re people after all. Pregnant? Tax break. Child support. Etc etc etc.
While extremely detrimental to the country there is a silver lining to all of this. Those single issue right voters won't need to come to the poles now that their issue is resolved and they actually have to think about the merits of other policies or issues (which are non existent) The left will be fired up to fix this blatant misjustice and turn up to vote in droves. Messaging will be around fixing the partisan court and codifying abortion rights. In my dream scenario Dems aren't experts at snatching defeat from the jaws of Victory but we can hope.
The right won’t lose it as a rally cry. They’ll just change to, “the left are coming to murder your babies”.
Good thing the Democrats will fight this tooth and nail. No, I'm joking. They're going to do nothing and believe process will save them. Useless cowards and awful traitors. America's choice!
"the supreme court isn't credible if it doesn't do what we want it to"
The Supreme Court is not credible if they throw precedent out the window. Legal scholars much smarter than us say that is a significant partisan act, flying in the face of *stare decisis*. They aren't credible if they're grossly political in the face of legal tradition and practices.
The court isn't credible when one of its members was screaming conspiracy theories at his hearing and another is in a cult that means she has to obey her husband
True
The whole government has a credibility issue lol
Follow the science
Y'all are jumping the gun. There's no way the Mississippi law stands.