Supreme Court Overturns Roe v. Wade

[mike]

https://apnews.com/article/abortion-sup ... 8cf8d8a7b0

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years in a decision by its conservative majority to overturn Roe v. Wade. Friday’s outcome is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states.

The decision, unthinkable just a few years ago, was the culmination of decades of efforts by abortion opponents, made possible by an emboldened right side of the court that has been fortified by three appointees of former President Donald Trump.

The ruling came more than a month after the stunning leak of a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito indicating the court was prepared to take this momentous step.

[joey_the_ox]

On the Solemnity of the Sacred Heart ....

[mike]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/2 ... e-00042244

The bombshell decision is set to upend races across the country as governors, attorneys general and other state and local leaders gain new powers to decide when abortion will be permitted, if at all, and who should be prosecuted and potentially incarcerated when bans take effect.

[RZehr]

Now, maybe a few other past court decisions should be binned as well. This one wasn’t the only ridiculous legislation that came from the courts.

[joey_the_ox]

Now, maybe a few other past court decisions should be binned as well. This one wasn’t the only ridiculous legislation that came from the courts.

Clarence Thomas, concurring: "in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell."

[mike]

Some headlines are saying it was a 5-4 decision, some 6-3. Apparently Roberts filed a concurring opinion separately from the other 5? From the last page of the ruling:

ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which THOMAS, GORSUCH, KAVANAUGH, and BARRETT, JJ., joined. THOMAS, J., and KAVANAUGH, J., filed concurring opinions. ROBERTS, C. J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., filed a dissenting opinion.

Link to ruling:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/2 ... 2_6j37.pdf

[mike]

One could see this decision causing a sort of cold civil war between abortion and non-abortion states.

Thus sayeth our governor in Pennsylvania:

[temporal1]

Page 18 / Opinion on the Roe v. Wade Leak
viewtopic.php?f=24&t=4820&p=160912#p160912

Unbelievable. After all these years, all the prayers. All the work. Oh me of little faith.
A couple years ago I would have said that this day would never come. Amazing.

Yes, I never really even entertained the idea that such a thing might happen.

Agreed. On this forum, it was discussed that RvW was an established accepted non-issue. (i might find the topic, not sure.)
Even after “The Leak,” it was no sure thing.

The most convincing flag was how some states (like mine, the state of Chicago) were industriously+preemptively passing pro-corporate-abortion laws, and building new abortion clinics NEAR STATE BORDERS.

PRO-CHOICE: Before conception. Think about it. For your sake and others.

[nett]

Now, maybe a few other past court decisions should be binned as well. This one wasn’t the only ridiculous legislation that came from the courts.

Clarence Thomas, concurring: "in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell."

Reconsider Griswold??? Has Amy Coney Barret convinced Clarence Thomas to return to his Catholic roots?

[temporal1]

Now, maybe a few other past court decisions should be binned as well. This one wasn’t the only ridiculous legislation that came from the courts.

Clarence Thomas, concurring:
"in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents,
including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell."

My perception is:
All the firestorm over RvW was/is PRINCIPALLY about LEGAL PRECEDENTS.
In truth, various states are more than ready to continue/increase the for-profit corporate abortion industry, a non-issue for them, regardless of noisy drama.

Overturn of RvW is important. It’s not the end of for-profit corporate abortion.