|
TyrantWD posted:Why would they go scorched earth over something that was already settled at the polls in 2016? As a country, we already had the debate and people decided they don’t really give a poo poo or are I’m favor of over turning Roe. I am not sure I agree that a decision by the council of ancient unelected wizards is necessarily a product of democracy
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 19:48 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1277695835413925888 (from back when he was campaigning) If he was going to do it he would have done it already. Or at least tried. What's the excuse for not even trying?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:31
|
|
|
haveblue posted:It looks like we’re going to get #2. Too bad almost all abortions after 15 weeks are performed out of dire medical need. I hope it doesn’t take too many Savita Halappanavars to get this undone Alito specifically says that it is up to the states. He isn't defining fetal personhood in this case (but, he is inching towards it relative to current law) If his ruling is the actual final holding, he is basically saying that states can do whatever they want with abortion after 15 weeks and before 15 weeks "it depends" with a bunch of hemming and hawing about exactly when viability has been scientifically determined and what kind of restrictions states can place on "post viability terminations." The focus on post-viability, medical science determining when that date is, and the references to states deciding political questions means he is saying that there isn't a flat ban on abortion after 15 weeks, but just that there is nothing stopping states from banning it after 15 weeks. Since this is a draft majority opinion and we don't know what/if the concurring opinions are from the other justices, it seems like the conservatives all agreed on allowing states to ban after 15 weeks, but couldn't agree on other aspects and limited the ruling to the Mississippi law at hand.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:32
|
|
|
New thread title https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1521316423666122753 Next question, which side leaked it. 1. A democratic appointed judge's clerk for obvious reasons 2. A GOP appointed judge's clerk to basically get the news out and get it out of the way as soon as possible before the mid terms. 3. Roberts did it to judge how he would vote based on public opinion. (His vote literally doesn't matter) Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 03:39 on May 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:32
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:New thread title yeah pretty much. Mods here are a perfect metaphor for how the news is treating this as well. "don't forget decorum!" There are easy solutions to this, but oh gosh even suggesting it will get you banned which is really just LMAO.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
I mean two easy solutions you can practice right now are voting and writing a letter to your representatives. Neither of these will get you banned, I hope.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:40
|
|
|
Wonder if Planned Parenthood is still feeling good about those Senate endorsements.   
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:41
|
|
|
TheIncredulousHulk posted:I am not sure I agree that a decision by the council of ancient unelected wizards is necessarily a product of democracy It was literally one of the biggest issues of the 2016 election. Everyone had a chance to weigh in on what they want the council of ancient unelected wizards to look like and do, and they made a decision. This is not some code red emergency that is going to demand an urgent response. This is what people voted for. It may have taken longer than expected to arrive, but it was pretty much explicitly voted on.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:41
|
|
|
LionArcher posted:yeah pretty much. Mods here are a perfect metaphor for how the news is treating this as well. "don't forget decorum!" There are easy solutions to this, but oh gosh even suggesting it will get you banned which is really just LMAO. You can argue whatever solutions you wish as long as it won't get the forums in legal trouble.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:42
|
|
|
Ahahaha it was probably Roberts that leaked it because he's already talking to CNN about his vote. https://twitter.com/ValerioCNN/status/1521316796103487489
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:43
|
|
|
LionArcher posted:yeah pretty much. Mods here are a perfect metaphor for how the news is treating this as well. "don't forget decorum!" There are easy solutions to this, but oh gosh even suggesting it will get you banned which is really just LMAO. Suddenly all that earlier revolution talk is a bit more topical, because you sure as hell can't vote your way out of a conservative-dominated, women-enslaving Supreme Court unless the party in power is willing to breach tradition and stack the court, and this one isn't.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:43
|
|
|
Looking forward to Collins' & Murkowski's heaping plates of humble pie & their offers to vote for pro-choice legislation as appropriate penance.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:44
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:It was literally one of the biggest issues of the 2016 election. Everyone had a chance to weigh in on what they want the council of ancient unelected wizards to look like and do, and they made a decision. Well the GOP stole a Supreme Court seat and the guy with less votes won so I don't think the people have voted for anything. Though they have, high and low, decided to not give a poo poo about fascism or fascists except for a minority of people, so I guess that's kind of deciding something.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:45
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:It was literally one of the biggest issues of the 2016 election. Everyone had a chance to weigh in on what they want the council of ancient unelected wizards to look like and do, and they made a decision. I disagree
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:47
|
|
|
The only solution to this right now is a mass protest movement that would dwarf even the Floyd protests, something that would actually shake and threaten the seats of power that allowed this. But like I said earlier, lots of people just stopped caring after Trump was voted out, and the party that replaced him just made things worse. I'm not gonna hold my breath waiting.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:47
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:It was literally one of the biggest issues of the 2016 election. Everyone had a chance to weigh in on what they want the council of ancient unelected wizards to look like and do, and they made a decision. Nah, the Supreme Court is about an undemocratic as it comes and if killing abortion rights were put up to a nation-wide vote it would never pass.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:49
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1277695835413925888 He made several speeches in promotion of it, including endorsing a bill to do so that passed the House. The DoJ has filed amici briefs in several of the antiabortion cases, including an amicus in this case. The president does not codify laws.
|
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:50
|
|
|
The weird thing is that (if Alito's opinion is the final holding) all of their waffling and hemming about what to do with abortion prior to 15 weeks means that they will inevitably start getting cases where they have to make more decisions on what can and can't be done during that period, which will just bring them exactly back to the "substitution of judicial values for democratic values" situation they said was intolerable before, except that they have pushed back the deadline from the end of the second trimester to the end of the first trimester. Kind of surprising they were willing to go this far, but not finish the job.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:50
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:I want to build a shrine to this take SCOTUS Blog, as I understand it, is supposed to give context for the intra-SCOTUS process and such. I thought this was a description of how the judges/clerks/etc in the court are going to take the leak, not the Official Opinion of the Blog. But yeah, things are looking grim but the "I told you so" brigade has no way of knowing the repercussions of this. This language, though, is some of the most blatantly political they could have phrased it, and instead of perhaps the GOP wishes to slowly draw the mask down, rips it right off to reveal the punitive, cruel, and archaic ghoul policies for all to see. There's no attempt to hide their utter contempt for women.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:51
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:He made several speeches in promotion of it, including endorsing a bill to do so that passed the House. The DoJ has filed amici briefs in several of the antiabortion cases, including an amicus in this case. Hmm maybe he shouldn't have said that he would codify the law then.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:51
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:He made several speeches in promotion of it, including endorsing a bill to do so that passed the House. The DoJ has filed amici briefs in several of the antiabortion cases, including an amicus in this case. What good is a bill that passes the House and not the Senate and why are you touting it like an accomplishment?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:56
|
|
|
Theory: someone in the supreme court hates the idea of Biden forgiving student loans. That person rightly believes student loans as his attempt to get election excitement for the party. So the person leaked the decision early to boost dem excitement and make the student loan thing not happen If they'd waited til the June decision date, the student loans would have already been forgiven
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:00
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Well the GOP stole a Supreme Court seat and the guy with less votes won so I don't think the people have voted for anything. Though they have, high and low, decided to not give a poo poo about fascism or fascists except for a minority of people, so I guess that's kind of deciding something. The electoral college is a debate for another time, but the GOP won the 2016 election by running on what they planned to do with the Supreme Court seat and what they hoped the court would do, and people outside the right wing didn’t really care then, and I don’t think their positions have changed since. We knew Roe could get overturned 5.5 years ago, and a large enough amount of people didn’t give a poo poo or rooted for that. Heck, one of the judges who knew she was a vital number in protecting Roe, wasn’t all that bothered with keeping up the fight. This news would have been gargantuan if it was April 2016, but it is a nothingburger in May 2022.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:00
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:I'm pretty sure that Sinema is pro-choice; they'd have to rotate in another baddie (although Manchin alone could kill it, minus any GOP support from Collins or Murkowski). Sinema is pro-choice but anti-removing the filibuster. Heck, even Manchin may make allusions to wanting to support abortion access, but both of them will use the filibuster as a shield. "No, not even for this."
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:01
|
|
|
I just don't think this will increase dem turnout in the midterms (I hope I'm wrong). Fascists get what they've wanted for decades because the people they voted for gave it to them. They can feel like winners AND stick it to Joe Biden. Meanwhile, progressives are going to be even more skeptical that voting for dems will protect even their most basic freedoms. I don't think this leak was tactical.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:03
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Hmm maybe he shouldn't have said that he would codify the law then. Indeed. Though he doesn't have the unilateral authority to codify Roe v. Wade, the wording of the promise implies responsibility for whether it happens or not. He didn't say "I will work to codify" or "we will codify," he said "I will codify."
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:04
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:What good is a bill that passes the House and not the Senate and why are you touting it like an accomplishment? I’d like to see someone just sign a house bill and tell the senate their services are no longer needed, but I don’t think it’s going to be on this bill, or this President
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:04
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:I just don't think this will increase dem turnout in the midterms (I hope I'm wrong). Fascists get what they've wanted for decades because the people they voted for gave it to them. They can feel like winners AND stick it to Joe Biden. Meanwhile, progressives are going to be even more skeptical that voting for dems will protect even their most basic freedoms. I don't think this leak was tactical. Well not voting for Dems did cost progressives this basic freedom. Elections have consequences. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:06
|
|
Koos Group posted:Indeed. Though he doesn't have the unilateral authority to codify Roe v. Wade, the wording of the promise implies responsibility for whether it happens or not. He didn't say "I will work to codify" or "we will codify," he said "I will codify." We've had this discussion so, so many times. Pretending ignorance of the basics of how the government works to attack Biden or "the Democrats" over a tweet talking about general agenda doesn't become any more intellectually honest the tenth time it happens.
|
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:07
|
|
|
Susan Collins is concerned and is "open to further discussions" about codifying Roe v. Wade, but opposes the Democrats' bill and eliminating the filibuster.quote:Senator Collins supports the right to an abortion and believes that the protections in the Roe and Casey decisions should be passed into law. She has had some conversations with her colleagues about this and is open to further discussions," But Collins opposes the House-passed Women's Health Protection Act, which Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has promised will get a vote in the Senate.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:07
|
|
|
Is this accurate? https://twitter.com/repdonbeyer/status/1521308218034733058?s=21&t=43B0qPI67oHAVTjh6LI02A
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:09
|
|
marshmonkey posted:Is this accurate? Yes. Here's the bill. The dem Nay vote was Henry Cuellar of Texas; Al Lawson, Jr. didn't vote, idk why. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 04:13 on May 3, 2022 |
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:09
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:Well not voting for Dems did cost progressives this basic freedom. Elections have consequences. "Sure we failed to deliver on literally anything, and in fact let one of our cornerstone policies get totally repealed, but when you think about it isn't this all the voters' fault?"
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:12
|
|
|
It's going to be interesting to see if Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema stand united on this one. This is going to get really intense.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:12
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:We've had this discussion so, so many times. Pretending ignorance of the basics of how the government works to attack Biden or "the Democrats" over a tweet talking about general agenda doesn't become any more intellectually honest the tenth time it happens. I do not give a single poo poo about "intellectual honesty" or whatever pedantic legalese you want to blather on about when basic human rights are being revoked. Biden promised to protect this right. He has failed. I'm sorry if you think that's an unfair attack, but it's going to be what a lot of other Americans are feeling when their rights are stripped away. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:15
|
|
|
marshmonkey posted:Is this accurate? The senate could pass a bill with 50 votes if they first used those 50 votes to change some procedures in how the senate votes, yes. They could do this any time they want.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:16
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:I do not give a single poo poo about "intellectual honesty" or whatever pedantic legalese you want to blather on about when basic human rights are being revoked. Biden promised to protect this right. He has failed. I'm sorry if you think that's an unfair attack, but it's going to be what a lot of other Americans are feeling when their rights are stripped away. If you don't give a poo poo about how the government works, or in speaking honestly about how it works, you shouldn't be in this subforum. I AM GRANDO posted:The senate could pass a bill with 50 votes if they first used those 50 votes to change some procedures in how the senate votes, yes. They could do this any time they want. This would require them to have the 50 votes to change the procedure.
|
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:17
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:We've had this discussion so, so many times. Pretending ignorance of the basics of how the government works to attack Biden or "the Democrats" over a tweet talking about general agenda doesn't become any more intellectually honest the tenth time it happens. With all due respect, if he didn't mean the phrasing of what he said, it's President Biden's intellectual honesty that ought to be called into question. If one intends to take credit for a success, they must also be prepared to take responsibility for a failure.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:18
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:Well not voting for Dems did cost progressives this basic freedom. Elections have consequences. Wow! Amazing! Heres a unifying message. We gotta vote and organize. We've gotta boycott and protest and risk our livelihoods and social status by never shutting the gently caress up about this. And when that inevitability fails (please prove me wrong), we kill and die. It's kind of the brutal chaotic law of existence. Do your pushups and squats and hey you can even own your posting enemies with videos of it if you're into that.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 19:48 |
|
|
obama could have codified roe, possibly without even needing to abolish the filibuster - there were at least 2 gop votes for it. i am unsure as to whether the decision was made not to do so because it was considered bad politics or if because they simply didn't feel it was a priority, but either way it was clearly the wrong decision. and incredibly short-sighted, as the dem party often is.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:20
|
|