|
FlamingLiberal posted:It's been brought up before, but that is just one insane rep being dumb
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2021 23:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:45 |
|
|
The fact that they are explicitly not putting the substance of SB8 on trial is really disturbing, considering even a bunch of the Conservatives went out of their way to talk about the Constitutionally Questionable substance of the thing the last time they let it stand.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 01:34
|
|
|
I've had a theory for awhile that they are going to try and find the way to kill abortion rights in this country that involves them not having to step forward and outright saying 'abortion is now illegal'. Greenlighting the existence of a completely absurd procedural thing like the enforcement mechanism for SB8 seems like exactly that scenario.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 02:47
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I've had a theory for awhile that they are going to try and find the way to kill abortion rights in this country that involves them not having to step forward and outright saying 'abortion is now illegal'. And they're not going to do it on the merits. They're going to say that the DoJ's suit is nonjusticiable and likewise the providers do not have standing because they're suing the wrong defendants.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:14
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I've had a theory for awhile that they are going to try and find the way to kill abortion rights in this country that involves them not having to step forward and outright saying 'abortion is now illegal'. If this court green-lights De Facto Nullification I can't even fathom what's going to happen in the next 3-5 years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:14
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:If this court green-lights De Facto Nullification I can't even fathom what's going to happen in the next 3-5 years. The states, in their equal dignity, will pass a number of terrible laws that should be federally prevented. Brain drain from Republican run states will increase, securing permanent minority control over the Senate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 14:19
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:It starts like that. I think there would far greater backlash if Obergefel was overturned than if Roe was. Views on abortion have always been split, but 70% are in favor of Gay marriage now, including 55% of republicans.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 15:05
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:I think there would far greater backlash if Obergefel was overturned than if Roe was. Views on abortion have always been split, but 70% are in favor of Gay marriage now, including 55% of republicans. My kneejerk reaction is "watch how fast that'd change if right-wing media started making noise about it", but that just makes me want to see polling on the subject of vaccines in general
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 16:49
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:The states, in their equal dignity, will pass a number of terrible laws that should be federally prevented. Brain drain from Republican run states will increase, securing permanent minority control over the Senate. The GOP already has permanent minority control over the senate. Did you mean permanent majority control? Because with the Jim Crow stuff they're passing and a SCOTUS that will further erode voting rights for minorities and the poor they're on their way to a permanent majority as well despite a shrinking total share of the population supporting them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 17:35
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:I think there would far greater backlash if Obergefel was overturned than if Roe was. Views on abortion have always been split, but 70% are in favor of Gay marriage now, including 55% of republicans. I would bet most Republicans would be like, "SCOTUS said gay marriage is illegal again? Well, nothing I can do, sorry gays!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 17:57
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:The GOP already has permanent minority control over the senate. Did you mean permanent majority control? Because with the Jim Crow stuff they're passing and a SCOTUS that will further erode voting rights for minorities and the poor they're on their way to a permanent majority as well despite a shrinking total share of the population supporting them. Yeah that, but they'll probably become an increasingly rump party in the House and possibly even the EC.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 17:58
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:I would bet most Republicans would be like, "SCOTUS said gay marriage is illegal again? Well, nothing I can do, sorry gays!" You mean the exact thing they did after the Shelby County ruling that (re)opened the floodgates for the GOP's attack on voting rights? Harold Fjord posted:Yeah that, but they'll probably become an increasingly rump party in the House and possibly even the EC. Don't count on it with the House. The GOP only needs to hold the state legislature and governorship once to give themselves a near unassailable grasp on the state and its redistricting. See Wisconsin for one of many examples. And with the Senate they can simply paralyze the government whenever they want and try to hold out until they win the WH and can flood the courts with more hacks like they did with Trump. And it's 100% possible for them to keep winning the WH as a rump party because low information voters will just see "things are bad. It's a Democrat in the WH therefore the Other Guy will be better."
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 18:04
|
|
|
In the 2018 election, Victor Orban won less than 50% of the votes and ended up with a supermajority of seats. I think that’s the GOP model.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 01:51
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:Does SCOTUS care if most people support it? I mean, doesn't abortion have 60% support? Most people also support voting rights, do they not? Democrats will say this as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 02:08
|
|
|
Call me an optimist, but I feel like the instant financial and social effects of millions of marriages just instantly evaporating would in fact trigger a backlash from the American public.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 03:26
|
|
|
What kind of backlash would it cause is probably the bigger question. Lots of donations for doomed democrats running in red states and large marches in urban areas don’t necessarily equate to anything happening
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 03:48
|
|
|
I’ve become very cynical about the prospect of the American public actually doing anything other than acclimating to whatever the new status quo is after some complaining. Even the completely psychotic right wing didn’t get all the way to organized violence or targeted assassination at their most emboldened and confident despite fantasizing about exactly that since Reagan. What will America’s liberals do? Post Randy Rainbow videos?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 04:00
|
|
|
Same sex marriage is safer than abortion because 1) it exists in the capital class and 2) abortion is wrongly seen as an issue only affecting women.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 04:42
|
|
|
Can't fly out of the country to get same-sex married illegally the way you can an abortion
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 04:59
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Can't fly out of the country to get same-sex married illegally the way you can an abortion Why not?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 05:31
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:Why not? A marriage for these purposes is a license obtained from a government which grants you the status of being married under the law. States that don't allow same-sex marriage can and will refuse to recognize it or grant that status. This was how things worked between the first states legalizing SSM and it going nationwide with Obergefell, it was possible for a couple to travel to a state where their marriage temporarily evaporated and reappeared when they left. Unlike abortion, which is one event where if they don't catch you in the act (because you left the state) there's nothing they can do about it later.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 05:39
|
|
|
haveblue posted:A marriage for these purposes is a license obtained from a government which grants you the status of being married under the law. States that don't allow same-sex marriage can and will refuse to recognize it or grant that status. This was how things worked between the first states legalizing SSM and it going nationwide with Obergefell, it was possible for a couple to travel to a state where their marriage temporarily evaporated and reappeared when they left. Unlike abortion, which is one event where if they don't catch you in the act (because you left the state) there's nothing they can do about it later. Except you know, criminal prosecution. After SB8 I am skeptical that jurisdiction would stop them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 06:05
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:I’ve become very cynical about the prospect of the American public actually doing anything other than acclimating to whatever the new status quo is after some complaining. Even the completely psychotic right wing didn’t get all the way to organized violence or targeted assassination at their most emboldened and confident despite fantasizing about exactly that since Reagan. What will America’s liberals do? Post Randy Rainbow videos? This is patently false though. They been committing organized violence since before January 6th, but hell, there's THAT. They've done targeted assassinations before, there's a long list of dead political activists and politicians that the right wing has murdered. Not to mention their attempt that was aided by insane republicans reps on Jan 6th that was just barely thwarted. The right is drenched in treachery and blood. They've shown time and again they will stop at nothing to impose their will.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 06:14
|
|
|
OniPanda posted:This is patently false though. They been committing organized violence since before January 6th, but hell, there's THAT. They've done targeted assassinations before, there's a long list of dead political activists and politicians that the right wing has murdered. Not to mention their attempt that was aided by insane republicans reps on Jan 6th that was just barely thwarted. The right is drenched in treachery and blood. They've shown time and again they will stop at nothing to impose their will. I forgot about the Portland proud boys, who could be described as organized. I guess I meant it more in the sense of a persistent organization vs stochastic terrorism that sustains itself through randomly distributed killing, which I agree we have had for a while.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 13:16
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:I’ve become very cynical about the prospect of the American public actually doing anything other than acclimating to whatever the new status quo is after some complaining. Even the completely psychotic right wing didn’t get all the way to organized violence or targeted assassination at their most emboldened and confident despite fantasizing about exactly that since Reagan. What will America’s liberals do? Post Randy Rainbow videos? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tucson_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_George_Tiller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting ...etc. The right wing in the US has repeatedly engaged in targeted assassination and terrorism against others in the US so please get out of whatever bubble you're living in and start living in reality. The right wing in the US has been on a slowly accelerating death march for decades and the Democrats consistently give ground to them. There was a brief period of cracking down on right wing extremists after the OKC bombing but even that ended since Federal agencies like the FBI exist to enforce a rightwing worldview, not to fight it. See also: The right wing screaming about that report a few years ago that correctly pointed out all the poo poo extremists in the US were getting up to.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 15:48
|
|
|
haveblue posted:A marriage for these purposes is a license obtained from a government which grants you the status of being married under the law. States that don't allow same-sex marriage can and will refuse to recognize it or grant that status. This was how things worked between the first states legalizing SSM and it going nationwide with Obergefell, it was possible for a couple to travel to a state where their marriage temporarily evaporated and reappeared when they left. Unlike abortion, which is one event where if they don't catch you in the act (because you left the state) there's nothing they can do about it later. I thought the defense of marriage act was what enabled states to refuse to recognize out of state marriage licenses issued to same sex couples. Isn't that dead law?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 19:17
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:I thought the defense of marriage act was what enabled states to refuse to recognize out of state marriage licenses issued to same sex couples. Isn't that dead law? If we're talking about a hypothetical future in which SCOTUS has revoked the right to same-sex marriage, they'll probably allow this too
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2021 19:39
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:I thought the defense of marriage act was what enabled states to refuse to recognize out of state marriage licenses issued to same sex couples. Isn't that dead law? Has congress revoked it or is it still on the books? If the later, then it goes back into effect if the Supreme Court overturns Obergefell.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 01:33
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Has congress revoked it or is it still on the books? If the later, then it goes back into effect if the Supreme Court overturns Obergefell. Still on the books. Overturning Obergefell but not Windsor would leave part of DOMA dead and require the feds to recognize same sex marriage but would permit states to decline to permit or recognize same sex marriage (the 2013-2015 status); they’d have to overturn both decisions for DOMA to fully go back in effect.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 01:56
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tucson_shooting I wouldn’t call that organized violence, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 02:46
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:I wouldn’t call that organized violence, though. Stochastic Terrorism is absolutely organized violence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lone_wolf_attacks#Stochastic_terrorism
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 03:21
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1453048454679248897
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 03:59
|
|
|
Keyword:dissent 
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 06:29
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:I wouldn’t call that organized violence, though. You're welcome to your opinion, factually wrong as it is. We desperately need a government, at any level, that refuses to acknowledge QI as valid and just starts imprisoning or otherwise punishing cops in open defiance of these batshit insane rulings.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 14:42
|
|
|
Granting QI when the cop acted illegally lol what a loving joke. Wish we had a functioning Congress so they could pass a bill!
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 15:07
|
|
|
Just waiting for the SCOTUS to cut to the logical endgame of QI and declare that law enforcement are completely immune from the law itself as long as they aren't attacking the ruling class.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 15:14
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:Granting QI when the cop acted illegally lol what a loving joke. Wish we had a functioning Congress so they could pass a bill! That doesn't actually matter, congress did pass a bill to make executive and judicial officers accountable for civil rights violations, the supreme court just ignored that and invented QI from nothing
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 16:08
|
|
|
Also the most recent attempt to reform QI through Congress went nowhere
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 16:14
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Also the most recent attempt to reform QI through Congress went nowhere The most recent attempt at anything in Congress has gone no where, by design, by the Republicans. It's why so much effort was put in packing the courts with Conservatives- if you can jam up the will of the people by destroying congress, you can minority rule via unelected judges in the courts. Kind of crazy how well it is working out for them both now and in the future, especially since 2024 will most likely be a shitshow of "Election of 2000" proportions. edit - Today Explained did a good episode on exactly this recently, on an episode called The Supreme Court’s legitimacy crisis. edit edit - sorry if probably preaching to the choir here. I forget that this thread has a lot of peeps who are pretty intimately familiar with this exact issue 
jeeves fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Oct 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 17:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:45 |
|
|
Between the GOP pushing extremely draconian Jim Crow laws in every state they currently control (and will pass in any they gain control of next year), and the DNC likely trying to force Harris as the candidate if Biden doesn't run again in 2024, I'd be surprised if the odds aren't in the GOP's favor. Especially since every social and economic issue is going to be blamed entirely on the Democrats since the media always finds an excuse for right wing obstructionism not being a problem. So it won't be a poo poo show like 2000 if for no other reason than an GOP win is going to be decisive enough to not require the courts to steal it after the fact.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 18:24
|
|