What will they do if that 6-3 court overturns Roe v Wade and bans abortion across the entire country?
Roe v Wade doesn’t make abortion legal and its absence wouldn’t make it illegal. The case makes abortion a constitutional right based upon a rather weird reading of the right to privacy.
You’ll note that here in the UK we do not have a constitutional right to abortion. We do have abortion. The French constitution does not announce a right to abortion – they have it too. And so on.
Abortion was legal in some parts of the US before Roe v Wade and becoming so in more of them.
If Roe v Wade were overturned – unlikely but it should happen because it was a shockingly bad piece of law even if excellent politics and possibly, dependent upon views, civil rights – then the legality or not of abortion would become a matter of democratic (no, not Democratic) politics in each state. Which is almost certainly where it should be too.
The legislatures – the mini-parliaments of each state – have the power to choose
Quite so. And why shouldn’t this be a matter of democracy?
Who will save America from the terrifying menace of… babies
Who will save America from the terrifying menace of… babies
My theory is that every conservative who gets elected on a promise of banning abortion is quietly taken aside and it is explained to them what the costs of all those Black babies would be if they lived to be born.
It would be considerable.
I think that turn about is fair play. I want the ACB Supreme Court to find the right to life in the midst of the Constitution some place and prohibit all the Democratic state from legalising abortion.
“The legislatures – the mini-parliaments of each state ”
Mini-parliaments? Compared to what? A UK parliament which got its laws delivered regularly by the EU to Freedland’s approval?
Most US politics goes on in the states. States with over twenty million people. Far more politics would be done in and by the individual states if the constitutional constraints on the Feds were taken seriously.
SMFS – the costs of all those Black babies would be if they lived to be born.
Stump thinking. Black women use abortion as a form of contraception because they can. The social structures that created abortion on demand and a culture of promiscuous fucking share the same load-bearing walls. And if Americans think there’s too many darkies, might as well nut up, control their borders, and Make Liberia Great Again, because passive-aggressive stealth genocide isn’t working unless the goal is to anger God.
Personally tho, after their exciting summer, if I were Americus Maximus I’d be genociding a whole bunch of wypipo with blue hair and septum piercings, with crucifixions lining the highways and a vigorous campaign against lawyers and journos that would make Hadrian’s excursion to Judea look like a Butlin’s holiday. Because No Lives Matter except the tiny innocent ones.
” Who’ll win the race for the White House? Join Guardian journalists Jonathan Freedland, Daniel Strauss, Lauren Gambino and Richard Wolffe for an online Guardian Live event”
That seems like a balanced panel. Let’s have a look at those Wikipedia ‘Early Life’ sections. Oh.
I suppose the one objection to the reversal of Rowe v Wade would be the length of time legalisation to legalise would be tied up in those state assemblies where they don’t already have it. Possibly generating further appeals to the US SC along the way. It’s not going to be a rubber stamp matter, is it?
‘And why shouldn’t this be a matter of democracy?’
Silly rabbit. The wimmins might lose. They support democracy as long as it will help them get what they want. If it won’t, they have no interest in it. It’s just a word that they can sometimes use to leverage conservatives.
Weren’t they hyperventilating in this way when the last right wing extremist/neo fascist was voted into the supremes? I thought the US was already supposed to have descended into a fascist “handmaids tale” dictatorship because of that decision.
How could it possibly deteriorate?
This intersectionality business is hard for me to follow.
Adopting babies from Haiti – bad.
Killing unborn babies from America – good
John: When I read comments like that I always hear it in George Bush’s voice.
As I read it, Wikipedia maintains that only the States of New York and Hawaii had abortion laws whose text was strictly conformant with SCOTUS’s verdict in Roe v Wade at the time of the decision. I had the impression that there were at least a few other States in which the de facto abortion law was conformant, but I don’t know for sure.
The reason this sticks in my memory is that, around 2007, I took a 60 question history/civics quiz for freshman law students at an elite US university that was posted online and score 57/60 with over-fine judgement on that point causing one of my 3 wrong answers. To that time I had never set foot west of the Atlantic; I wonder what score Johnathon Freedland, author of “Bring Home the Revolution” (https://www.amazon.co.uk/BRING-HOME-REVOLUTION-British-Republic/dp/0007291515), would have got.
SMFS,
“My theory is that every conservative who gets elected on a promise of banning abortion is quietly taken aside and it is explained to them what the costs of all those Black babies would be if they lived to be born.”
Most politicians just talk about abortion, or illegal immigrants, prostitution or dealing with Islamist terror, but really do not give that much of a shit. This is stuff you have to say to get the conservative base to vote for you.
Then you do some sort of media show in these areas, like doing a raid of the odd immigrant cluster, all accompanied by media cameras so that people think the government is serious about this problem, while the statistics show otherwise.
I think the internet may have really changed politics because it’s possible for small parties and small politicians to get known, to get carried via the social connections of people.
Democrats will lie, cheat and/or steal to keep any Trump nominee out.
Abortion is a hot button issue for many women. The Democrats exploit that.
Barrett seems to be an excellent choice, like she has actually read the Constitution, but adopting babies from Haiti shows a lack of judgement.
Here’s how bad it has gotten in the U.S.:
‘Lambda Legal, an LGBT civil rights organization, co-signed a letter with 26 other gay rights organizations opposing Barrett’s nomination. The letter expressed doubts about her ability to separate faith from her rulings on LGBT matters.’ – Wiki
There is nothing in the Constitution about LGBT. What they are decrying is that Barrett will NOT make up some standard to give them special treatment. Just as the court made up the Roe v Wade decision. They fear she will do her FVCKING JOB. The Left wants her blocked because she will be good. The ironing being they will go into Senate hearings fighting against her because she will be good. It will be as surreal as with Kavanaugh. Graham has said the he will keep the hearing under control, that he won’t allow the Dems to abuse her. Which makes us all laugh.
The Washington clown show has begun.
“Weren’t they hyperventilating in this way when the last right wing extremist/neo fascist was voted into the supremes? I thought the US was already supposed to have descended into a fascist “handmaids tale” dictatorship because of that decision.”
Its always the ‘next’ one that will cause that. Rather like the way its always the Government spending via borrowing it hasn’t done (but is urged to by the Left) will always be the spending that will pay for itself via some magic multiplier effect.
Incidentally one hasn’t noticed that argument being made about the covid surge in debt spending. Surely this amount of cash (more than anyone has ever suggested government spending be raised by, even Jeremy Corbyn) being splooged up against the wall will result in a a massive rise in growth and tax revenues, as predicted for every other big rise in Government expenditure the Left has called for, for just about ever?
Interesting read for those who believe that what people who never spoke to Keynes call Keynesian Economics is effective
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/09/data-dispel-keynesian-economics-again/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
This intersectionality business is hard for me to follow.
Adopting babies from Haiti – bad.
Killing unborn babies from America – good
And remember, there’s also SCIENCE… Where climate change is a proven fact but conception being the starting point of life is not.
I’d bet that every State currently has abortion laws compliant with the constitution, as interpreted by Roe v Wade. The chances of any of them evading a lawsuit this long are tiny.
Hence should Roe v Wade be set aside the delay will be in making any alterations that are made possible and judged desirable. So if any State wants to reduce abortion rights it is that which will take time.
Jonathan Freedland has the sort of face I couldn’t tire of punching.
Aren’t there 2 issues the legality or otherwise of abortion and the regulation as a medical practice.
This has lead to some States trying to regulate it out of existence and rights groups arguing against making abortion safer as they see it as an attack on the right to an abortion.
Ok . . . we don’t have ‘constitutional rights’ over here. We have human rights. These exist before the government. Which the constitution directs the US government to protect. None of our rights come from the constitution – otherwise they wouldn’t be rights and would be privileges extended by the government to its subjects.
So, we have all the rights – including the infinity-bajillion not listed in the Bill of Rights. Hence why, contrary to a lot of people’s thinking, a constitutional amendment to remove the 2nd amendment still won’t allow the country to make firearms illegal nor to restrict them in any significant way – same as removing the first would not allow the state to close down churches or bloggers.
Secondly, while national abortion comes from an extension of right to privacy, the underlying right to privacy is just one of the many, many, unenumerated rights that people have – its not a ‘weird reading of the right to privacy’ (which the government ignores in pretty much every other situation anyway *sigh*) but a pretty straight extrapolation from the Constitution and precedent.
But yes, overturning RvW would just bump the question back down to individual states. And while these insane fucking progs will scream bloody murder about ‘Handmaid’s Tale’ (which was an allegory for the regime in Iran – but they choose to ‘death of the author that), its trivially easy to cross a state line here.
Also, does the Guardian think states are ‘mini-parliaments’? I don’t believe their is a single government in the US, at any level, that is organized on parliamentary lines.
I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t call the Scottish parliament a ‘mini-parliament – and state governments have similar levels of autonomy.
I like this: “You know shits getting serious when the Amish get involved”
https://i.redd.it/5t2ji8twfzk51.png
Jim–Rise in tax/growth–don’t think so.
Inflation–well hardly proof but did weekly shop at ASDA–maskless (weak goons on the door but my printed exempt badge did the trick) and with the exception of special offer on Butter–EVERYTHING else seemed to have gone up by 5–maybe 10%.
I think inflation IS gonna bite hard this time.
£221 billion printed since April=450 to 500 billion by next April.Millions on dole and inflation to boot.
It has started already, Salty Cracker has the latest – because the salt must flow…
https://youtu.be/mntRappIHQo
Mr Ecks, I had the opposite experience at Morrisons in Durham. Many items lower in price, for instance 2x sirloin steak deal that used to be £7 seems to be £6 permanently. Tesco had rotisserie standard chicken at £3.40. What I did see though was lots more people stockpiling again. Don’t I just hate these fat twats who walk very slowly in front of you, can’t overtake them, no space, then when they get just outside they stop and block the exit and start fiddling with their mask. Sorry, didn’t realise there were other people here wanting to exit the fucking shop. My evil look from behind the Israeli flag mask shut the fat fuck up.
“Secondly, while national abortion comes from an extension of right to privacy, the underlying right to privacy is just one of the many, many, unenumerated rights that people have”
“Right to privacy” is made up. It’s not in the Constitution.
As I said – in America, our rights do not come from the constitution. So a right to privacy not appearing in the constitution is irrelevant.
Even the constitution tells you that the enumerated rights are not the sum total of rights people have. They are a small list of rights that a faction of the Founders thought were important enough that they needed to be added in to clarify and punctuate their importance.
” . . . it was a shockingly bad piece of law even if excellent politics . . . ”
Yes. This. Exactly. And cheaply had, at only the small small cost of the stature of the United States Supreme Court. Would that some Senator had found a way to ram this through instead.
“As I said – in America, our rights do not come from the constitution. So a right to privacy not appearing in the constitution is irrelevant.”
But in America, it is only those rights appearing in our legal foundational documents that are within the purview of the Court to enforce.
It would help if people stopped talking about “rights”. They’re a legal fiction don’t exist. What do exist are the obligations that the State lays upon the citizen & ultimately compels by force. So the question really is by consent or not by consent?
Gibberish, Mr Agammamon.
That’s . . . not even close to being true.
Even English legal tradition recognizes that rights come from outside of government.
The rights enumerated in the Constitution are negative rights. Where the exercise of of those rights does not infringe on others exercise of those rights.
Your right of free speech or religion does infringe on anyone else’s free speech. Although the “triggered” folks are trying to change that.
Abortion cannot be a negative right. At least two are always affected.