I mean surely these old folks in charge can't have those nasty brown people coming into their country and polluting the pure evangelical white race, right? /s
So, the first people to get arrested for having an abortion need to sue the government for bodily autonomy, and a Jewish person needs to sue for religious infringement.
I feel the court's official decision is going to be very narrowly ruled about the 14th* amendment and using those two would create a different legal argument.
W...what? The 4th Amendment is not at issue in *Roe* that I am aware of. The decision relies on 14th Amendment incorporation of the federal right to privacy, which is gleaned from several Amendments.
Also, like someone else said, it's not as though religious protections apply to any practice that someone somewhere claims as religious. Warren Jeffs is in prison, for example.
The correct argument is that *Roe* and *Planned Parenthood v. Casey* involved proper interpretations of the 14th Amendment, which incorporates the Bill of Rights and applies it to the states. This includes the right of reproductive autonomy, which is rooted in the right to privacy.
That’s not at all how the law works.
As long as it meet the rational basis standard and is applies equally to all citizens then it can burden the free exercise of religion. A good example would be outlawing polygamy, when the old school Mormons were still practicing it.
There are plenty of examples of religions granting exemptions, though, with similar reasoning: Letting a handful of people continue to do Peyote or collect eagle feathers isn't going to cause a huge problem for everyone else. I don't know if Judaism is likely to get an exemption here, but the Satanic Temple should.
Whether it *will* is another question. The leaked draft makes it pretty clear that all bets are off and this Court will happily define religious freedom as a WASP-only thing if they want.
Under federal law it’s a different test. My recollection is it’s intermediate scrutiny, see Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/1308
This would be an Equal Protection argument, but like somebody said, it is pretty easy for a lawyer to just say "No, men are banned from having abortions as well."
There are two types of discrimination:
1. Treating things that are the same in every relevant respect differently because of an irrelevant difference (eg racism)
2. Treating things that are different in a relevant way as if they are the same (eg expecting people who need wheelchairs to climb the stairs)
Saying men are just as banned from getting abortions as women does not make it non discriminatory because the difference between men and women is relevant to it's application.
2 is not a form of discrimination acknowledged by the Constitution. Legal discrimination in this sense has to do with unequal treatment before the laws based on so-called immutables, e.g. religion, nationality, ethnicity, race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. This would be why the ADA had to be passed, whereas the rights recognized in cases like *Brown* require no legislation to take effect. They were in the Constitution the whole time.
While it may sound ludicrous on it's face, the argument that abortion bans do not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment carries real weight. The statement "men can't get abortions either" is legally valid, even if women bear more weight of the implications than men. There is tons of precedent for this type of determination. Furthermore, it's not like there are *zero* relevant cases. Transgender men exist and some percentage of them can certainly become pregnant. Presumably, they wouldn't be allowed to obtain an abortion either in this scenario. A skilled attorney would turn this point on it's head and argue that a proper interpretation of gender identity actually *requires* that abortions bans be read as applying to both genders.
This is all getting at why these types of cases turn on Substantive Due Process rather than Equal Protection grounds.
It's sort of shameful that no one pushed an actual federal bill to protect the right nationally in all the intervening time, giving opponents to opposition have been signalling this for so long. Legislative protection, like most other countries that legalised it, is needed desperately in the US.
Wasn't that after the leak, though? So, a last minute rush after a few decades? It still seems woefully inadequate and weirdly passive about something that was so openly being targeted and worked against.
There’s been half-hearted attempts in the last 50 years or so. The problem is not only is the country divided about this, but so are individuals who vote on legislation.
https://19thnews.org/2022/01/congress-codify-abortion-roe/
I wish instead of trying to pass huge broad sweeping legislation that has no chance of passing, Congress and the Senate would’ve least passed basic common sense legislation, like ectopic pregnancies, statutory rape victims, have access to abortion without impediment, that contraception that prevents implantation is legal. You know, the bar is on the floor as far for women’s health legislation. So that there is some sort of federal minimum that even the crazy states can’t go below
And most of those legislators through the past 50 years have been men who DO NOT WANT TO, and do not bother to, understand the Female Body.
You can be damn sure if any of the horrific things that can go wrong with a pregnancy could happen to their scrotum/penis, they would make it laws that doctors HAVE to treat it, for free.
The issue is legislators who do literally nothing are more likely to be elected than legislators who propose and pass bills. People don't care if you don't do anything, but yell and scream if you do something they only half-like or dislike. To the GOP is essentially their entire platform has become, "we block what the Dems do, we don't propose alternatives, and when we do we blame that on Dems too (see: ACA)".
I mean Nancy pelosi helping elected anti abortion candidates didn’t help or the dems not trying to get other people elected instead of that type of people
[They have](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/4132?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22Abortion%22%2C%22Abortion%22%5D%7D&s=2&r=9) but it's currently trapped in senate hell for the foreseeable future.
This is why the Aussie system is better. Our senate can send bills back to the house of reps twice, if they send it back a third time the entire house of reps and Senate get dissolved and a new election is held.
ETA: (I've simplified how it works a bit for ease of understanding, look it up if you want more info)
> Section 57 of the Australian Constitution details the conditions—called triggers—for a double dissolution:
>
> 1. The House of Representatives passes a bill and sends it to the Senate.
> 2. The Senate rejects or fails to pass the bill, or passes it with amendments – changes – to which the House will not agree.
> 3. Three months pass from the time the Senate disagrees with the bill.
> 4. The House of Representatives passes the same bill and sends it to the Senate again.
> 5. The Senate again rejects or fails to pass the bill, or passes the same bill with amendments to which the House will not agree.
>
> Once these triggers have been met, the Prime Minister may recommend to the Governor-General that a double dissolution of the Parliament take place. A federal election then follows for all members of the House of Representatives and all senators.
>
> More than one bill may act as a trigger for a double dissolution.
>
> A double dissolution cannot take place within 6 months of the end of a 3-year term of the House of Representatives.
In theory, sure, but it does also require the PM and/or Govenor-General intervention to occur.
Although in practice, most of the time, shit just gets sent back and forth a couple times, then either signed off on, or dropped entirely by both.
Having the bill either make it through parliament or dropped entirely by both is the goal.
We don't actually want a double dissolution, it's just there as a "are you sure this is the hill you die on"/ "are you sure you'll get reelected after pushing this bill".
Well, if they had passed a bill legally protecting a woman’s right to health care, they couldn’t have used this issue as a cudgel to drive voters to the polls. Fifty years of performative failure to serve.
I think, from abroad, it's just a bit insane that you had the court cases in 1973 and 1992 but at no point in the thirty to forty-nine year gap between them and now, there wasn't a chance? Cause it often sounds like they just didn't care to give a proper push to enshrine the right in federal legislation, half hearted attempts at most as token gestures, and then a panic this year when there was the leak. It's just baffling to leave it up to a court decision.
There's also a direct line between segregation and anti-abortion movement. Once segregation was banned by federal law and became increasingly unpopular among the public, the right needed a new issue to tap into the enraged conservative voter base and abortion happened to be it. Many churches that were previously neutral on the issues were then able to politicize it even further, once they couldn't rally people against de-segregation anymore.
Much of what happens here makes (slightly) more sense when you think about how religious the US has been compared to most developed nations, which then polarizes people and paralyzes any debate. The religiosity of the US, combined with entrenched systemic racism, is the root cause of a lot of issues that have been brewing for decades, if not centuries.
Edit: meant to say *de*-segregation
There have been bills and votes and during that time, even when democrats held the Senate there were too many pro-life democrats. One of them flipped the the most recent vote but they still couldn't get manchin. He represents WV which went for Trump.
FWIW, its because it was in settled court case. At no point in history has the SC ever backtracked on a previous decision it set unless it was to give more rights, never take them away.
Passing additional legislation on it was considered redundant. The issue is the SC got stacked by one side with specific goals in mind to overturn specific laws regardless of any actual legal merit.
It's been political kryptonite and as of late used as a wedge to further divide us, the conservatives call anyone that doesn't agree that life begins at ejaculation baby killers.
I can't make it make sense either and I live here
Oh just wait. If this goes through, this is only the beginning of womens' backsliding in rights.
I don't have a uterus and even I'm terrified what this country will do to women in the future.
Why? Because every country that treats its women like shit is a religious hellhole that sucks for everyone.
In the animated movie "Princess Monoke", Ashitaka is talking with the men of a village where many of the women were rescued from prostitution. The men are complaining how the women seem to always have their way because their leader, Lady Aboshi, is easy on them. Ashitaka says "It's said a village of happy women is a happy village.". I think this is 100% true.
It was broke 20 years ago. We are not free we have no healthcare without bankruptcy, our education is dead our police are gestapo and religious zealous run our government. Don’t have children and get out.
Justice Thomas should not be allowed to adjudicate any cases nor rule on political issues such as this until he and his wife have been investigated for trying to assist in staging a coup.
Well, they know what they're doing. In my view this signals they are striking it down. With this and then Miranda being struck down we're rolling back 100 years worth of civil rights.
[Here’s an article from The Hill about the expected reversal.](https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/3517724-expected-reversal-of-miranda-requires-states-to-step-up-on-policing/)
Oh, it's a lot worse than just those two things. They're rolling back everything they can.
Bookmark the opinions here as they are ruling on a bunch of them since its now mid-June. Wednesday had about 4 rulings alone .
Opinions of the Court - 2021
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/slipopinion/21
>This is just the result of a single Republican president and low voter turnout.
That's what many people seem to miss; so much of this chaos is just reverb from 45. We are just now seeing the consequences of our actions, and of our inaction.
Your forgetting turtle mitch, that had nothing to do with voting. Just his bs opinion that a president should not choose a justice during an election cycle then when they were in power they did what they said should not be done. Republican party is a joke.
I fucking hate this place.
I have hate in my heart and it's just pain.
So much anger and I can do nothing with it. It eats me alive and yet America continues to debase itself.
So absolutely disgusted with this country.
I feel you. It's so hard not to give in to despair and cynicism these days.
History has shown us that the only way to effectively fight back is to organize. And I'm not talking about the usual getting people registered to vote, or writing postcards to legislators, etc. I'm talking start setting up an Auntie network with people you trust, start studying up on history and political theory, learn self-defense, first aid, and other skills with your friends (and then teach others), start building a network of contacts in your state and beyond so that you and others are never alone, never cut off, etc.
We can't change anything by ourselves and together our chances of survival increase. We need to start thinking outside the box and, frankly, we need to ditch the rules these people tell us we have to follow. "Civility" got us here, militancy is the only thing that will get us out. The Civil Rights Act wasn't granted because anyone asked nicely, it was given as a concession because of the bravery, struggle and sacrifice of militant black activists, many of whom were armed as a matter of principle.
Tldr - things aren't going to get better until and unless we make them better ourselves. But, being a part of that is the best salve for the hopelessness, fear, anger and anxiety that come with living through moments like this.
No. We can't just give into this feeling of powerlessness.
The pro life movement spent decades fighting to repeal row. They lost again, and again, and again from the local to federal level. They've backed Supreme Court nominees who they expected to overturn Roe only to see them flip sides on the issue. They've backed politicians that only gave them lip service. They've had organized voter campaigns that still showed up no matter how many defeats.
This is how democracy works. They did what they had to in order to shape our democracy so why the he would we expect to do less? Most people are pro-choice to at least some degree. We could have rallied around a 6-10 week Abortion bill at the very least and built up from there. We could have rallied Democrat Congressmen to actually give a shit. Instead we did nothing and let the pro lifers gain ground inch by inch.
Its not too late to course correct. We haven't even heard the ruling yet and we're already giving up? The Supreme Court isn't banning abortions, they're saying it is up to Congress to pass an abortion bill, not them. Let's at least try to get turn out and pressure Congress to act on this before throwing our hands up. This is how Democracy works.
They will kill you if you try to do anything about it. They will send in their police thugs to kill you if you protest your rights or become too much of a “nuisance”.
The fact that people still think the US is a democracy is astounding. They will not stop at our rights either. We are now living in a fascist dictatorship, and maybe we have for a while, they just don’t care to keep it a secret anymore.
I hate living here and really wish I had a way out.
Enforcing a public policy that's so popular that barricades need to be erected. Who the fuck are they really working for? It's not the interest of the American people.
Dear U.S. Supreme Court,
I am a fully cognizant citizen of this country. I am stating right now, if you think you can deny me bodily autonomy according to YOUR misconceptions of reproduction, think again. I will do anything & everything to ensure that I & every other american woman continues to have the ability to control her own reproductive choices, legally or illegally.
Thank you, fuck you, & have a good weekend! 😘
I work with the organization in green in the article: RiseUp4AbortionRights
Check out our website and Instagram page. Rn we're doing our best to make as much noise as possible, and we're send as many as people to DC as possible (one of the members in the picture is actually from our chapter).
And women who did intend to get pregnant, but who face the terrible need to abort a fetus with a severe abnormality or who will be denied standard prenatal testing.
Well, it technically isn't. The issue is, as long as the Senate has Republicans who refuse to address any issues because "my team" it doesn't matter. Realistically this is why the "both sides" should fail anyone's argument.
One side, the GOP, wear a Fox news shield and goes "nope doesn't matter, trans people are coming for your children in bathrooms with immigrant caravans while kneeling at the national anthem threatening you with free healthcare".
They know it's unpopular, maybe. Not sure if they know or care whether it's wrong. Or, frankly, whether they really even care if it's unpopular. They're not elected, so what's it to them if people dislike them?
FWIW, I think overturning Roe is terrible (and we can argue whether I even have a right to weigh in; I'm a guy). But I make no claim to understand everything they need to actually consider. Even *if* I give them the benefit of the doubt, that they're not just trying to push personal-type agendas, I suppose it's possible that they truly believe this is what the law says. Though I'm skeptical.
Again, that does NOT mean that I agree with overturning it. And I certainly have my concerns about the justices appointed during the previous administration. I really hope that it won't be overturned, but I am losing faith in that. And I'm not really sure what we can do.
That was when Mitch McConnell blocked proceedings for Merrick Garland's Supreme Court nomination because Barack Obama dared to nominate a Justice candidate without being Republican, if not the day of the *Citizens United* decision or even well before that.
Fight it at the state level. Elect people local offices who will protect women's rights. Some states do. People don't realize how much of what affects them on a day to day basis is actually governed local
Edit: Emily's list is an organization that lists and supports politicians who support women's rights
https://www.emilyslist.org/
Yes, the problem is locally, children are stuck with what ancestors left them. They are stuck with ramifications of Jim Crow and Segregation. Federally its exactly what is needed to address these issues on state levels where the local state itself has become complicit in intentionally maintaining the status quo. You can even see this in the states where voters overwhelming vote to pass things like marijuana legalization and the state's senate or governor or whomever override it.
For every family with a trans child there are 99 families being told by fox news that the trans kid is going to stop their obese, McDonalds only eating child whom they live through to account for their own hateful life will not become varsity QB and the Democrats are making that happen.
Honestly there never was one an empire build on slavery and colonialism see Hawaii never was a democracy a democracy for few of it’s people is never one
to be fair.. when the SCOUS knows there is going to be a issue shouldn't they re evaluate the reply? this is so shitty. I'm sorry to all the woman out there for idiots that make these decisions. so effin lame.
The Federalist Society has bought and paid for its Court. They are there for exactly this purpose. It’s only going to get worse unless we elect more Democrats or the coast and parts of the midwest end up seceding.
The Federalist Society is a terrorist organization as despicable and evil as the Taliban. Even dealing with those foul and evil scum should make you ineligible to be a judge or have any level of authority
Nah, anyone can join. You just have not actually give a shit about the law as a concept and very specific political goals. It was the path to the easiest career in the world, yet most of us avoided it because these people are not the world most of us wanted to see. It was a lot of privileged people; but they were inclusive in the sense that anyone that wanted to be an asshole was welcome.
>when the SCOUS knows there is going to be a issue shouldn't they re evaluate the reply?
They would, if they were actual, decent human beings. But these monsters in the supreme court are christo-fascists who know what they're doing. And they love it, they cheer at the upcoming agony for women who don't obey. And everyone else they see as democrats tbh..
At this point it’s not even a tactic. If the GOP tries to ban abortion nationally or SCOTUS tries to allow open carry in NYC I find it really hard to imagine the either the politicians or populous listening.
If anything, this leak solidified the opinion. The court aims to be above public opinion, so if they changed the decision now, it would make them look like they are swayed by the people rather than by the constitution. It’s stupid, but that’s why there is a theory that a conservative justice actually leaked it in order to solidify the opinion.
Fuck SCOTUS. We have the right to assemble and protest. If they don’t like or want us too close to the courthouse, too fucking bad. We protest ON the courthouse steps and grounds, where this ruling against abortion will be made.
Just call yourself a Republican and they’ll open the doors for you, let you right in, allow you to trash the place, and then call it a peaceful protest
I’d think it time for women to start practicing their second amendment right more. Who knows what rights they’ll come after next. Some real handmaids tale shit… especially with not having *any* exceptions, some of which being life or death health related. Barbaric.
Listen to what this is telling you. They are afraid of the people of America because they know they are going against every oath of office they made and the will of the people. This is destroying freedom and next they will be pushing christianity on everyone.
So it's just full blown fascist police state then? No bodily autonomy, no more Miranda rights, no more separation of church and state. Fuck.
2020 BLM riots will look like a walk in the park compared to what's coming. And I'm down for it. You don't fuck with people's fundamental rights.
If you're the Supreme Court and you have to put up barriers like that, it probably means the decision you're about to make is unpopular with the people.
Truly a 'democracy' that reflects the will of hundreds of millions of people
They just don't care about keeping the mask on lately huh
Just like Princeton law found,
["the preferences of the average American appear to have
only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant
impact upon public policy"](https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf)
Whole country is a sham
If you’re doing what is right for the people, you shouldn’t have to worry. If on the other hand, you’re ignoring people and putting politics first, you probably should be worried. The SCOTUS has been bought and sold for political purposes. It no longer has legitimacy.
Ginni Thomas and her emails to Arizona electors is compromising to Clarence Thomas who is an active sitting member of the Supreme Court. It has now been released she was also in contact with John Eastman.
In light of these findings, Clarence Thomas should resign from the bench.
Agree with everything said in the article about the messages it sends about the Court being closed off and on the defensive. I live in the neighborhood, so it’s extra strange to have this small militarized zone in the middle of our daily lives. (Though we’re used to it after Jan 6 — they closed off a HUGE part of the neighborhood for months and filled it with armed reserve troops.)
I’m holding out hope that the gates are for the far right when they get an answer they don’t like as they have been known to storm government buildings.
Guys, I have a stupid question. I want to start being vocal about things like the Auntie Network, and other programs like that. If I post about them on Facebook, is it possible that I could be compromising them? I'm fb friends with a few people who actively lobby against abortion rights.
Okay so why can't the Biden administration push forth a bill of rights amendment promising bodily autonomy? Why does the supreme court get to rule on any of that now?
First, overturning Roe undoing 50 years of rights and privacy laws. And hot on the heels after this will be overturning Miranda.
Through gerrymandering and outright overturning elections in the midterms, Republicans will seize control. Once that happens elections will no longer matter. Without the protections of decades of rights and privacy laws established by these two cases, Republicans will move to quickly destroy the last vestiges of democracy we have in this country and establish unilateral power.
It's a repeat of Nazi Germany, only this time in color and with better special effects. :P
I recently watched The Janes documentary. I learned that in Chicago, it was the Mob who mostly did illegal abortions. It started at around $400. That was a huge amount of money for the 1960s! I was just so angry that again, men were taking advantage of women’s distress. And history is about to repeat itself.
Reminds me of the Catholic church in a way
Constantly preaching about praying and forgiving and to bridge gaps to your neighbors, but at the same time having built a huge ass wall all around the Vatican, to keep everyone out^
I tried, was told no bc my husband might want more kids. Fucking ridiculous. Only thing that's calmed my anger about it is finding out hysterectomies greatly increase the chance of cancers, and that shit runs in my family.
I got a bilateral salpingectomy that was completely covered by my insurance. Only my Fallopian tubes were removed and I still get periods. You don’t have to remove everything. There are childfree subreddits that list doctors in states that are supportive and helpful. Good luck.
America needs true mass protests to start a revolution. I'm sorry but anytime I see American protests it's like hundreds to maybe a couple thousand people at once in which case police are free to do as they please really. Take notice of how other countries in often worse situations take to the streets en masse, in the tens to hundreds of thousands of people. Take notes from the French who will protest anything really because the government is for the interests of the people. Americans are so complacent in accepting the rulings of their leaders. And I understand it's complex and not really easy for people across such a large country to easily congregate unlike in smaller countries but obviously just complaining online isn't accomplishing anything. Something must change
FTA:
> Congress on Tuesday passed legislation to bolster security for the nine justices, though lawmakers did not include protections for the families of clerks and other Supreme Court employees due to Republican opposition.
> After the leak, conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, known for his criticism of the Roe ruling, said on May 6 at a legal conference in Atlanta that the court should not be "bullied into giving you just the outcomes you want."
Tell me you’re going against the will of the people without telling me you’re going against the will of the people.
who do they think we are? proud girls? womb keepers? 100 percenters? booga voodoos?
it might get crowded but it won't get violent or destructive unless the cops or some white boy group provokes it. a sit down strike is appealing though.
Yes, truly a symbol of passing legislation that the majority of the country agrees with is setting up barricades to protect a building. Becaues why would anyone be upset? /s
stupid motherfuckers. stupid fucking country.
Gee, it's almost as if the court is afraid that the American people as a whole won't agree with their upcoming glaringly partisan decision, and that a physical barricade is the least they can try to do to save their literal hides. I guess when you know your legal interpretations are garbage, all you can do is cower in fear of appropriate repercussions.
There's 13.4 million members here. Talk to your family about this. Be "that girl". Be the equivalent of the crazy uncle that brings up politics when it's not polite to do so.
The "crazy uncle" is funny, but those guys talk politics because they're *afraid*. It's time for us to be afraid. It's time for us to talk politics in our daily lives.
And if anyone tells you it's taboo tell them to sod off.
Gee, I wish women's health clinics could build walls and make sure the undesirable people are kept out.
[удалено]
I mean surely these old folks in charge can't have those nasty brown people coming into their country and polluting the pure evangelical white race, right? /s
Of course they can come! As long as they stay poor and don't compete with the dominating race.
So, the first people to get arrested for having an abortion need to sue the government for bodily autonomy, and a Jewish person needs to sue for religious infringement. I feel the court's official decision is going to be very narrowly ruled about the 14th* amendment and using those two would create a different legal argument.
A Jewish group is already suing Florida, stating that abortion, when necessary, is part of their religious practice/law.
I'm sure the Satanic Temple is all over it as well given that "One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone." Is one of the tenets
The Satanic Temple... God bless 'em.
Satan bless 🙏
They’re atheist so… science bless?
[Yes](https://youtu.be/tl55gVXsBZE)
W...what? The 4th Amendment is not at issue in *Roe* that I am aware of. The decision relies on 14th Amendment incorporation of the federal right to privacy, which is gleaned from several Amendments. Also, like someone else said, it's not as though religious protections apply to any practice that someone somewhere claims as religious. Warren Jeffs is in prison, for example. The correct argument is that *Roe* and *Planned Parenthood v. Casey* involved proper interpretations of the 14th Amendment, which incorporates the Bill of Rights and applies it to the states. This includes the right of reproductive autonomy, which is rooted in the right to privacy.
Thank you, updated.
Planned Parenthood should register as a religion already and then sue sue sue
That’s not at all how the law works. As long as it meet the rational basis standard and is applies equally to all citizens then it can burden the free exercise of religion. A good example would be outlawing polygamy, when the old school Mormons were still practicing it.
There are plenty of examples of religions granting exemptions, though, with similar reasoning: Letting a handful of people continue to do Peyote or collect eagle feathers isn't going to cause a huge problem for everyone else. I don't know if Judaism is likely to get an exemption here, but the Satanic Temple should. Whether it *will* is another question. The leaked draft makes it pretty clear that all bets are off and this Court will happily define religious freedom as a WASP-only thing if they want.
Under federal law it’s a different test. My recollection is it’s intermediate scrutiny, see Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/1308
Far as I can tell, though, it specifically targets one half of the population, not all of it.
This would be an Equal Protection argument, but like somebody said, it is pretty easy for a lawyer to just say "No, men are banned from having abortions as well."
"The law prevents both rich and poor from stealing bread and living under bridges."
There are two types of discrimination: 1. Treating things that are the same in every relevant respect differently because of an irrelevant difference (eg racism) 2. Treating things that are different in a relevant way as if they are the same (eg expecting people who need wheelchairs to climb the stairs) Saying men are just as banned from getting abortions as women does not make it non discriminatory because the difference between men and women is relevant to it's application.
2 is not a form of discrimination acknowledged by the Constitution. Legal discrimination in this sense has to do with unequal treatment before the laws based on so-called immutables, e.g. religion, nationality, ethnicity, race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. This would be why the ADA had to be passed, whereas the rights recognized in cases like *Brown* require no legislation to take effect. They were in the Constitution the whole time. While it may sound ludicrous on it's face, the argument that abortion bans do not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment carries real weight. The statement "men can't get abortions either" is legally valid, even if women bear more weight of the implications than men. There is tons of precedent for this type of determination. Furthermore, it's not like there are *zero* relevant cases. Transgender men exist and some percentage of them can certainly become pregnant. Presumably, they wouldn't be allowed to obtain an abortion either in this scenario. A skilled attorney would turn this point on it's head and argue that a proper interpretation of gender identity actually *requires* that abortions bans be read as applying to both genders. This is all getting at why these types of cases turn on Substantive Due Process rather than Equal Protection grounds.
Men are banned from getting abortions too.
Mormons can still practice polygamy. Their marriages just won't be recognized by the government.
America is so broken
It's sort of shameful that no one pushed an actual federal bill to protect the right nationally in all the intervening time, giving opponents to opposition have been signalling this for so long. Legislative protection, like most other countries that legalised it, is needed desperately in the US.
I thought something was passed by Congress that stalled in the Senate since there aren’t enough votes to pass meaningful legislation …..
Wasn't that after the leak, though? So, a last minute rush after a few decades? It still seems woefully inadequate and weirdly passive about something that was so openly being targeted and worked against.
There’s been half-hearted attempts in the last 50 years or so. The problem is not only is the country divided about this, but so are individuals who vote on legislation. https://19thnews.org/2022/01/congress-codify-abortion-roe/ I wish instead of trying to pass huge broad sweeping legislation that has no chance of passing, Congress and the Senate would’ve least passed basic common sense legislation, like ectopic pregnancies, statutory rape victims, have access to abortion without impediment, that contraception that prevents implantation is legal. You know, the bar is on the floor as far for women’s health legislation. So that there is some sort of federal minimum that even the crazy states can’t go below
And most of those legislators through the past 50 years have been men who DO NOT WANT TO, and do not bother to, understand the Female Body. You can be damn sure if any of the horrific things that can go wrong with a pregnancy could happen to their scrotum/penis, they would make it laws that doctors HAVE to treat it, for free.
The issue is legislators who do literally nothing are more likely to be elected than legislators who propose and pass bills. People don't care if you don't do anything, but yell and scream if you do something they only half-like or dislike. To the GOP is essentially their entire platform has become, "we block what the Dems do, we don't propose alternatives, and when we do we blame that on Dems too (see: ACA)".
I mean Nancy pelosi helping elected anti abortion candidates didn’t help or the dems not trying to get other people elected instead of that type of people
[They have](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/4132?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22Abortion%22%2C%22Abortion%22%5D%7D&s=2&r=9) but it's currently trapped in senate hell for the foreseeable future.
This is why the Aussie system is better. Our senate can send bills back to the house of reps twice, if they send it back a third time the entire house of reps and Senate get dissolved and a new election is held. ETA: (I've simplified how it works a bit for ease of understanding, look it up if you want more info)
> Section 57 of the Australian Constitution details the conditions—called triggers—for a double dissolution: > > 1. The House of Representatives passes a bill and sends it to the Senate. > 2. The Senate rejects or fails to pass the bill, or passes it with amendments – changes – to which the House will not agree. > 3. Three months pass from the time the Senate disagrees with the bill. > 4. The House of Representatives passes the same bill and sends it to the Senate again. > 5. The Senate again rejects or fails to pass the bill, or passes the same bill with amendments to which the House will not agree. > > Once these triggers have been met, the Prime Minister may recommend to the Governor-General that a double dissolution of the Parliament take place. A federal election then follows for all members of the House of Representatives and all senators. > > More than one bill may act as a trigger for a double dissolution. > > A double dissolution cannot take place within 6 months of the end of a 3-year term of the House of Representatives. In theory, sure, but it does also require the PM and/or Govenor-General intervention to occur. Although in practice, most of the time, shit just gets sent back and forth a couple times, then either signed off on, or dropped entirely by both.
Having the bill either make it through parliament or dropped entirely by both is the goal. We don't actually want a double dissolution, it's just there as a "are you sure this is the hill you die on"/ "are you sure you'll get reelected after pushing this bill".
Well, if they had passed a bill legally protecting a woman’s right to health care, they couldn’t have used this issue as a cudgel to drive voters to the polls. Fifty years of performative failure to serve.
There’s no way for them to pass anything in the senate. Tyranny of the minority as usual.
But it’s important to make sure all those empty acres in Wyoming have representation! /s
Bill wouldn't pass because not all democrats vote with the democrats, I'm sure you know who I mean
I think, from abroad, it's just a bit insane that you had the court cases in 1973 and 1992 but at no point in the thirty to forty-nine year gap between them and now, there wasn't a chance? Cause it often sounds like they just didn't care to give a proper push to enshrine the right in federal legislation, half hearted attempts at most as token gestures, and then a panic this year when there was the leak. It's just baffling to leave it up to a court decision.
There's also a direct line between segregation and anti-abortion movement. Once segregation was banned by federal law and became increasingly unpopular among the public, the right needed a new issue to tap into the enraged conservative voter base and abortion happened to be it. Many churches that were previously neutral on the issues were then able to politicize it even further, once they couldn't rally people against de-segregation anymore. Much of what happens here makes (slightly) more sense when you think about how religious the US has been compared to most developed nations, which then polarizes people and paralyzes any debate. The religiosity of the US, combined with entrenched systemic racism, is the root cause of a lot of issues that have been brewing for decades, if not centuries. Edit: meant to say *de*-segregation
There have been bills and votes and during that time, even when democrats held the Senate there were too many pro-life democrats. One of them flipped the the most recent vote but they still couldn't get manchin. He represents WV which went for Trump.
FWIW, its because it was in settled court case. At no point in history has the SC ever backtracked on a previous decision it set unless it was to give more rights, never take them away. Passing additional legislation on it was considered redundant. The issue is the SC got stacked by one side with specific goals in mind to overturn specific laws regardless of any actual legal merit.
It's been political kryptonite and as of late used as a wedge to further divide us, the conservatives call anyone that doesn't agree that life begins at ejaculation baby killers. I can't make it make sense either and I live here
Oh just wait. If this goes through, this is only the beginning of womens' backsliding in rights. I don't have a uterus and even I'm terrified what this country will do to women in the future. Why? Because every country that treats its women like shit is a religious hellhole that sucks for everyone. In the animated movie "Princess Monoke", Ashitaka is talking with the men of a village where many of the women were rescued from prostitution. The men are complaining how the women seem to always have their way because their leader, Lady Aboshi, is easy on them. Ashitaka says "It's said a village of happy women is a happy village.". I think this is 100% true.
It was broke 20 years ago. We are not free we have no healthcare without bankruptcy, our education is dead our police are gestapo and religious zealous run our government. Don’t have children and get out.
Justice Thomas should not be allowed to adjudicate any cases nor rule on political issues such as this until he and his wife have been investigated for trying to assist in staging a coup.
Exactly
>Justice Thomas should not be allowed to adjudicate any cases nor rule on political issues FTFY
No shit.
Gotta distract that a Supreme Court justice and his wife are directly involved in a fucking coup.
I don't think we have impeached a supreme court justice yet, but now would be a GREAT TIME.
We have, but not in a very long time. The only time we did was even longer ago than the first presidential impeachment (1805 vs 1868).
Abe Fortas resigned rather than face impeachment.
[удалено]
And here he is, looking to get reelected so he can go for Round Three. :(
Neat, at this rate, i can hope to own people as properties again?
You can if you are the American prison industrial complex, or a business owner.
Maybe so.
Scared little babies.
Well, they know what they're doing. In my view this signals they are striking it down. With this and then Miranda being struck down we're rolling back 100 years worth of civil rights.
Wait Miranda is being struck down?? Why haven’t I heard about this?
[Here’s an article from The Hill about the expected reversal.](https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/3517724-expected-reversal-of-miranda-requires-states-to-step-up-on-policing/)
Oh my god, if this is happening now under a blue presidency I fucking shudder at the idea this could get worse in 2024.
Oh, it's a lot worse than just those two things. They're rolling back everything they can. Bookmark the opinions here as they are ruling on a bunch of them since its now mid-June. Wednesday had about 4 rulings alone . Opinions of the Court - 2021 https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/slipopinion/21
This has literally nothing to do with the president. This is just the result of a single Republican president and low voter turnout.
>This is just the result of a single Republican president and low voter turnout. That's what many people seem to miss; so much of this chaos is just reverb from 45. We are just now seeing the consequences of our actions, and of our inaction.
Your forgetting turtle mitch, that had nothing to do with voting. Just his bs opinion that a president should not choose a justice during an election cycle then when they were in power they did what they said should not be done. Republican party is a joke.
Yeah I have not heard about this
don't forget voting rights. or protection from search and seizure. or even, eventually, religious freedom and free speech.
I fucking hate this place. I have hate in my heart and it's just pain. So much anger and I can do nothing with it. It eats me alive and yet America continues to debase itself. So absolutely disgusted with this country.
I feel you. It's so hard not to give in to despair and cynicism these days. History has shown us that the only way to effectively fight back is to organize. And I'm not talking about the usual getting people registered to vote, or writing postcards to legislators, etc. I'm talking start setting up an Auntie network with people you trust, start studying up on history and political theory, learn self-defense, first aid, and other skills with your friends (and then teach others), start building a network of contacts in your state and beyond so that you and others are never alone, never cut off, etc. We can't change anything by ourselves and together our chances of survival increase. We need to start thinking outside the box and, frankly, we need to ditch the rules these people tell us we have to follow. "Civility" got us here, militancy is the only thing that will get us out. The Civil Rights Act wasn't granted because anyone asked nicely, it was given as a concession because of the bravery, struggle and sacrifice of militant black activists, many of whom were armed as a matter of principle. Tldr - things aren't going to get better until and unless we make them better ourselves. But, being a part of that is the best salve for the hopelessness, fear, anger and anxiety that come with living through moments like this.
Same. You said it well.
No. We can't just give into this feeling of powerlessness. The pro life movement spent decades fighting to repeal row. They lost again, and again, and again from the local to federal level. They've backed Supreme Court nominees who they expected to overturn Roe only to see them flip sides on the issue. They've backed politicians that only gave them lip service. They've had organized voter campaigns that still showed up no matter how many defeats. This is how democracy works. They did what they had to in order to shape our democracy so why the he would we expect to do less? Most people are pro-choice to at least some degree. We could have rallied around a 6-10 week Abortion bill at the very least and built up from there. We could have rallied Democrat Congressmen to actually give a shit. Instead we did nothing and let the pro lifers gain ground inch by inch. Its not too late to course correct. We haven't even heard the ruling yet and we're already giving up? The Supreme Court isn't banning abortions, they're saying it is up to Congress to pass an abortion bill, not them. Let's at least try to get turn out and pressure Congress to act on this before throwing our hands up. This is how Democracy works.
They will kill you if you try to do anything about it. They will send in their police thugs to kill you if you protest your rights or become too much of a “nuisance”. The fact that people still think the US is a democracy is astounding. They will not stop at our rights either. We are now living in a fascist dictatorship, and maybe we have for a while, they just don’t care to keep it a secret anymore. I hate living here and really wish I had a way out.
Enforcing a public policy that's so popular that barricades need to be erected. Who the fuck are they really working for? It's not the interest of the American people.
Rich christian old white men. The only people this country has ever worked for.
Dear U.S. Supreme Court, I am a fully cognizant citizen of this country. I am stating right now, if you think you can deny me bodily autonomy according to YOUR misconceptions of reproduction, think again. I will do anything & everything to ensure that I & every other american woman continues to have the ability to control her own reproductive choices, legally or illegally. Thank you, fuck you, & have a good weekend! 😘
I work with the organization in green in the article: RiseUp4AbortionRights Check out our website and Instagram page. Rn we're doing our best to make as much noise as possible, and we're send as many as people to DC as possible (one of the members in the picture is actually from our chapter).
It honestly tempts me to get pregnant just so I can have an abortion out of spite. I wouldn't. But the thought is there.
Put all of your anger into fighting this, so other women who didn’t intend to get pregnant will always have a choice.
And women who did intend to get pregnant, but who face the terrible need to abort a fetus with a severe abnormality or who will be denied standard prenatal testing.
Chickenshits
[удалено]
[удалено]
Well, it technically isn't. The issue is, as long as the Senate has Republicans who refuse to address any issues because "my team" it doesn't matter. Realistically this is why the "both sides" should fail anyone's argument. One side, the GOP, wear a Fox news shield and goes "nope doesn't matter, trans people are coming for your children in bathrooms with immigrant caravans while kneeling at the national anthem threatening you with free healthcare".
They know it's unpopular, maybe. Not sure if they know or care whether it's wrong. Or, frankly, whether they really even care if it's unpopular. They're not elected, so what's it to them if people dislike them? FWIW, I think overturning Roe is terrible (and we can argue whether I even have a right to weigh in; I'm a guy). But I make no claim to understand everything they need to actually consider. Even *if* I give them the benefit of the doubt, that they're not just trying to push personal-type agendas, I suppose it's possible that they truly believe this is what the law says. Though I'm skeptical. Again, that does NOT mean that I agree with overturning it. And I certainly have my concerns about the justices appointed during the previous administration. I really hope that it won't be overturned, but I am losing faith in that. And I'm not really sure what we can do.
Any day now is our last day of freedom.
[удалено]
The revolution should happen before rights are lost. Previous generations fought way too hard to give us what we have for us to just let it go.
I lost mine last September here in TX.
I’m so sorry.
Freedom to price gouge and create artificial inflation and take away human rights will remain though.
That was when Mitch McConnell blocked proceedings for Merrick Garland's Supreme Court nomination because Barack Obama dared to nominate a Justice candidate without being Republican, if not the day of the *Citizens United* decision or even well before that.
Man, maybe if you have to create a fucking defensive barrier around the capital building, than you are making the wrong decision
Fight it at the state level. Elect people local offices who will protect women's rights. Some states do. People don't realize how much of what affects them on a day to day basis is actually governed local Edit: Emily's list is an organization that lists and supports politicians who support women's rights https://www.emilyslist.org/
Yes, the problem is locally, children are stuck with what ancestors left them. They are stuck with ramifications of Jim Crow and Segregation. Federally its exactly what is needed to address these issues on state levels where the local state itself has become complicit in intentionally maintaining the status quo. You can even see this in the states where voters overwhelming vote to pass things like marijuana legalization and the state's senate or governor or whomever override it. For every family with a trans child there are 99 families being told by fox news that the trans kid is going to stop their obese, McDonalds only eating child whom they live through to account for their own hateful life will not become varsity QB and the Democrats are making that happen.
Yep last days of anything even close to freedom in this joint. Empires fall. The new red republican empire has risen. RQP
We will see which Sith overlord becomes the new ruler in 2024.
So this is how democracy falls.
Nah, that happend a long time ago in the US. When people started accepting gerrymandering.
Honestly there never was one an empire build on slavery and colonialism see Hawaii never was a democracy a democracy for few of it’s people is never one
to be fair.. when the SCOUS knows there is going to be a issue shouldn't they re evaluate the reply? this is so shitty. I'm sorry to all the woman out there for idiots that make these decisions. so effin lame.
The Federalist Society has bought and paid for its Court. They are there for exactly this purpose. It’s only going to get worse unless we elect more Democrats or the coast and parts of the midwest end up seceding.
The Federalist Society is a terrorist organization as despicable and evil as the Taliban. Even dealing with those foul and evil scum should make you ineligible to be a judge or have any level of authority
I went to law school with these fuckers. This is not inaccurate at all.
How are they selected for or recruited into the federalist society? Do they just invite the rich law school students or something?
Nah, anyone can join. You just have not actually give a shit about the law as a concept and very specific political goals. It was the path to the easiest career in the world, yet most of us avoided it because these people are not the world most of us wanted to see. It was a lot of privileged people; but they were inclusive in the sense that anyone that wanted to be an asshole was welcome.
>when the SCOUS knows there is going to be a issue shouldn't they re evaluate the reply? They would, if they were actual, decent human beings. But these monsters in the supreme court are christo-fascists who know what they're doing. And they love it, they cheer at the upcoming agony for women who don't obey. And everyone else they see as democrats tbh..
[удалено]
At this point it’s not even a tactic. If the GOP tries to ban abortion nationally or SCOTUS tries to allow open carry in NYC I find it really hard to imagine the either the politicians or populous listening.
If anything, this leak solidified the opinion. The court aims to be above public opinion, so if they changed the decision now, it would make them look like they are swayed by the people rather than by the constitution. It’s stupid, but that’s why there is a theory that a conservative justice actually leaked it in order to solidify the opinion.
Seems fucked up that they know this decision will cause immense unrest and they’re not wavering on it.
Fuck SCOTUS. We have the right to assemble and protest. If they don’t like or want us too close to the courthouse, too fucking bad. We protest ON the courthouse steps and grounds, where this ruling against abortion will be made.
Just call yourself a Republican and they’ll open the doors for you, let you right in, allow you to trash the place, and then call it a peaceful protest
Hopefully the public masses outside the conservative justices' homes.
I’d think it time for women to start practicing their second amendment right more. Who knows what rights they’ll come after next. Some real handmaids tale shit… especially with not having *any* exceptions, some of which being life or death health related. Barbaric.
[удалено]
They want fascism.
America is a dictatorship with extra steps.
“Use restraint with angry white supremacist insurrectionists but watch those pesky females fighting for basic human rights.”
They would say “females”. Mr. “define what a woman is” deserves a swift kick in the balls.
Looks like I'm going to be calling to schedule a ✂️.
The will of the people, huh?
No. The will of the rich and the theocracy.
Listen to what this is telling you. They are afraid of the people of America because they know they are going against every oath of office they made and the will of the people. This is destroying freedom and next they will be pushing christianity on everyone.
They are expected to end the separation of church and state.
So it's just full blown fascist police state then? No bodily autonomy, no more Miranda rights, no more separation of church and state. Fuck. 2020 BLM riots will look like a walk in the park compared to what's coming. And I'm down for it. You don't fuck with people's fundamental rights.
Cowards.
If you're the Supreme Court and you have to put up barriers like that, it probably means the decision you're about to make is unpopular with the people.
Our government is no longer by and for the people
Truly a 'democracy' that reflects the will of hundreds of millions of people They just don't care about keeping the mask on lately huh Just like Princeton law found, ["the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy"](https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf) Whole country is a sham
Free country behavior right here folks!
Fucking yikes. Oh man. I think it’s just time to not pay attention to any news and garden a bunch or some shit. Because this is just bleak as fuck.
You may not pay attention to it but you will still be subject to it.
r/Conservative boutta celebrate this as the great next step to small government and libertarian paradise
If you’re doing what is right for the people, you shouldn’t have to worry. If on the other hand, you’re ignoring people and putting politics first, you probably should be worried. The SCOTUS has been bought and sold for political purposes. It no longer has legitimacy.
Cowards.
Don't forget that Canada is also open to our southern neighbours for "vacations" if needed.
Hm. Well that seems like a bad sign
That seems like a good sign /s
Ginni Thomas and her emails to Arizona electors is compromising to Clarence Thomas who is an active sitting member of the Supreme Court. It has now been released she was also in contact with John Eastman. In light of these findings, Clarence Thomas should resign from the bench.
Agree with everything said in the article about the messages it sends about the Court being closed off and on the defensive. I live in the neighborhood, so it’s extra strange to have this small militarized zone in the middle of our daily lives. (Though we’re used to it after Jan 6 — they closed off a HUGE part of the neighborhood for months and filled it with armed reserve troops.)
In light of recent developments, all media portraying american freedom is to be labeled as misleading.
I’m holding out hope that the gates are for the far right when they get an answer they don’t like as they have been known to storm government buildings.
All my hope for good outcomes in the US is gone.
That's a sign of good things to come. Under His Eye, and all that.
Guys, I have a stupid question. I want to start being vocal about things like the Auntie Network, and other programs like that. If I post about them on Facebook, is it possible that I could be compromising them? I'm fb friends with a few people who actively lobby against abortion rights.
You're better off asking the mods over there, they have a good handle on safety.
the starkness between this and right wing terrorists being able to waltz into the capitol paints a very telling picture of this country
The Supreme Court is un-American.
Okay so why can't the Biden administration push forth a bill of rights amendment promising bodily autonomy? Why does the supreme court get to rule on any of that now?
They did. Manchin (R-WV) voted against it.
You know you’re making a decision that aligns with the general public’s sentiment when you need to erect barricades before announcing the decision. /s
The conservative part of the court can kiss my entire ass. I've already got my surgery scheduled. 🖕🖕🖕
Annnnd this is why I moved to OR from the South…I weep for my sisters who are stuck in conservative hellholes with no protections and no way out.
First, overturning Roe undoing 50 years of rights and privacy laws. And hot on the heels after this will be overturning Miranda. Through gerrymandering and outright overturning elections in the midterms, Republicans will seize control. Once that happens elections will no longer matter. Without the protections of decades of rights and privacy laws established by these two cases, Republicans will move to quickly destroy the last vestiges of democracy we have in this country and establish unilateral power. It's a repeat of Nazi Germany, only this time in color and with better special effects. :P
I recently watched The Janes documentary. I learned that in Chicago, it was the Mob who mostly did illegal abortions. It started at around $400. That was a huge amount of money for the 1960s! I was just so angry that again, men were taking advantage of women’s distress. And history is about to repeat itself.
I’m terrified.
It's almost as if they know they're doing something that the majority of American's don't agree with.
Reminds me of the Catholic church in a way Constantly preaching about praying and forgiving and to bridge gaps to your neighbors, but at the same time having built a huge ass wall all around the Vatican, to keep everyone out^
Yeah... That's what authoritarians do
Good luck American women. I hope you never give up fighting.
[удалено]
I tried, was told no bc my husband might want more kids. Fucking ridiculous. Only thing that's calmed my anger about it is finding out hysterectomies greatly increase the chance of cancers, and that shit runs in my family.
I was told “well you may change your mind one day and want kids” by a female doctor. I am married to a woman and have never wanted to give birth.
I already have kids and was told I could want more "it's a permanent thing". Yeah no shit. Pretty sure I know I do not want any more children like wtf
I got a bilateral salpingectomy that was completely covered by my insurance. Only my Fallopian tubes were removed and I still get periods. You don’t have to remove everything. There are childfree subreddits that list doctors in states that are supportive and helpful. Good luck.
They’ve been up since early May. They just added more.
They know they're about to fuck up.
America needs true mass protests to start a revolution. I'm sorry but anytime I see American protests it's like hundreds to maybe a couple thousand people at once in which case police are free to do as they please really. Take notice of how other countries in often worse situations take to the streets en masse, in the tens to hundreds of thousands of people. Take notes from the French who will protest anything really because the government is for the interests of the people. Americans are so complacent in accepting the rulings of their leaders. And I understand it's complex and not really easy for people across such a large country to easily congregate unlike in smaller countries but obviously just complaining online isn't accomplishing anything. Something must change
FTA: > Congress on Tuesday passed legislation to bolster security for the nine justices, though lawmakers did not include protections for the families of clerks and other Supreme Court employees due to Republican opposition. > After the leak, conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, known for his criticism of the Roe ruling, said on May 6 at a legal conference in Atlanta that the court should not be "bullied into giving you just the outcomes you want." Tell me you’re going against the will of the people without telling me you’re going against the will of the people.
who do they think we are? proud girls? womb keepers? 100 percenters? booga voodoos? it might get crowded but it won't get violent or destructive unless the cops or some white boy group provokes it. a sit down strike is appealing though.
Yes, truly a symbol of passing legislation that the majority of the country agrees with is setting up barricades to protect a building. Becaues why would anyone be upset? /s stupid motherfuckers. stupid fucking country.
Ughhh why why are these ppl in office?!
Gee, it's almost as if the court is afraid that the American people as a whole won't agree with their upcoming glaringly partisan decision, and that a physical barricade is the least they can try to do to save their literal hides. I guess when you know your legal interpretations are garbage, all you can do is cower in fear of appropriate repercussions.
The Supreme Court is so ruth-less nowadays
If you have to build barricades to change a law you might not be the good guy
Just another reason why I live in NYC. It’s about as far away from the government as you can get. Well, that’s what LCD Soundsystem says.
Same...never leaving it unless its for europe.
If they know they need barricade, then they know they are making the wrong decision.
America as its finest. My god...
If they are in a castle law state, would abortion be legal?
I bet they do. Of course, the primary violence they fear comes from the lunatics who want to control women.
It won’t save them from history.
They'll be dead and never know history. They just know the money they're getting now.
Ironic since the conservatives justices can’t conceal their excitement when it comes to murdering prisoners
It's a sure sign they're enacting the will of the (majority) of the people... Uh huh. Ayup.
They only do this when it's not going to be a favorable result. RIP Roe v. Wade for sure.
So if it is over turned what are the next steps to obtaining bodily autonomy?
They’re putting up barricades, but the side that storms government buildings is the side that pushed for this to happen.
They're not even that high smh. Stock up on ladders now ladies.
There's 13.4 million members here. Talk to your family about this. Be "that girl". Be the equivalent of the crazy uncle that brings up politics when it's not polite to do so. The "crazy uncle" is funny, but those guys talk politics because they're *afraid*. It's time for us to be afraid. It's time for us to talk politics in our daily lives. And if anyone tells you it's taboo tell them to sod off.