Roe v Wade to be overturned

[Satchel 6,982]

Tennessee HB 2779, which is modeled after the Texas bill, would allow the family of the rapist or other interested parties to sue the rape victim should she decide to practice bodily autonomy and terminate her pregnancy. Corpses will have more rights than women.

[Aqua Buddha 14,782]

 

[Satchel 6,982]

An abortion ban in Texas appears to be on the horizon, but a new poll shows that 54% of voters oppose such a ban.

Driving the news: A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court privately voted to strike down Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 abortion decision, per a draft document obtained by Politico. 

• The ruling would leave it up to states to decide how to govern the procedure, and Texas is one of 13 states with a so-called "trigger law" that would make performing abortion a felony within 30 days of a SCOTUS judgment.

The big picture: Just over one-third of registered voters would support such a ban, the poll from the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas found. 

• State Democrats overwhelmingly oppose banning access to abortion — and Texas Republicans generally favor such a move.
• The findings are similar to nationwide polling that shows a majority of Americans think Roe should be upheld. A Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted last week found that 54% of Americans think the Roe decision should stand, while 28% say it should be overturned.

By the numbers: The Texas Politics Project survey, conducted April 14-22 and released today, found little change in the existing pattern of responses to the question: "Do you support or oppose automatically banning all abortions in Texas if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade?"

• Among all registered voters, 35% support banning abortion and 54% do not.
• 80% of Democrats oppose banning access to abortion in Texas, per the poll.
• Republican opinion on the question isn't as lopsided: 57% of Republicans support a complete ban should Roe be overturned, while 34% oppose banning all access.

[Pig Bellmont 8,867]

5 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I don't think it would have been as bad without social media really blowing up during Obama's presidency too.

Prior to Facebook, they just would have muttered some racial slurs at him while having coffee and voted for whatever milquetoast Republican candidate entered the platform.

A real email from a family member “FW: FW: FW: FW: Watermelon at the White House”

[Michael Knight 13,187]

2 hours ago, Satchel said:

An abortion ban in Texas appears to be on the horizon, but a new poll shows that 54% of voters oppose such a ban.

Driving the news: A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court privately voted to strike down Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 abortion decision, per a draft document obtained by Politico. 

• The ruling would leave it up to states to decide how to govern the procedure, and Texas is one of 13 states with a so-called "trigger law" that would make performing abortion a felony within 30 days of a SCOTUS judgment.

The big picture: Just over one-third of registered voters would support such a ban, the poll from the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas found. 

• State Democrats overwhelmingly oppose banning access to abortion — and Texas Republicans generally favor such a move.
• The findings are similar to nationwide polling that shows a majority of Americans think Roe should be upheld. A Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted last week found that 54% of Americans think the Roe decision should stand, while 28% say it should be overturned.

By the numbers: The Texas Politics Project survey, conducted April 14-22 and released today, found little change in the existing pattern of responses to the question: "Do you support or oppose automatically banning all abortions in Texas if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade?"

• Among all registered voters, 35% support banning abortion and 54% do not.
• 80% of Democrats oppose banning access to abortion in Texas, per the poll.
• Republican opinion on the question isn't as lopsided: 57% of Republicans support a complete ban should Roe be overturned, while 34% oppose banning all access.

It doesn't matter what the voters of Texas want because in the end they will vote Republican anyways

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,706]

13 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

It doesn't matter what the voters of Texas want because in the end they will vote Republican anyways

I have friends that mainly talk about sports and they probably are 99% republicans. When they were recently complaining about the NCAA allowing college players to be paid via NIL, I pointed out to the them that it was the state govt (Abbott) that passed the NIL (for Texas) and not the NCAA. They didn't want to blame the GOP for the NIL and the subject was changed to something else. They didn't want to hear something negative that the GOP did.

[Pancho 46,046]

1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I have friends that mainly talk about sports and they probably are 99% republicans. When they were recently complaining about the NCAA allowing college players to be paid via NIL, I pointed out to the them that it was the state govt (Abbott) that passed the NIL (for Texas) and not the NCAA. They didn't want to blame the GOP for the NIL and the subject was changed to something else. They didn't want to hear something negative that the GOP did.

They never fucking do. 

I’ve informed my RRR friends some of the shit their party as approve and what they do and they all quickly change the subject.

[The Original Greaser Bob 2,880]

I'm curious as to whether there is a recognized symbol of reproductive rights in the nature of a flag or bandana (green wave(marea verde)/polish red lightening bolt) that is in common use in the US or that can be a unifying symbol to show the bearer is pro-choice. I've been too complacent to notice, if there is one.

[hpslugga 4,096]

4 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I have friends that mainly talk about sports and they probably are 99% republicans. When they were recently complaining about the NCAA allowing college players to be paid via NIL, I pointed out to the them that it was the state govt (Abbott) that passed the NIL (for Texas) and not the NCAA. They didn't want to blame the GOP for the NIL and the subject was changed to something else. They didn't want to hear something negative that the GOP did.

Dishonest people tend to behave that way.

[Helobious 9,755]

Dave Portnoy coming out as pro-choice today was a shocker. Bizarro world.

['stache 22,115]

16 hours ago, Michael Knight said:

It doesn't matter what the voters of Texas want because in the end they will vote Republican anyways

Yup, I keep reading stuff like this and know with absolute certainty it means jack shit. They'll just misuse the term socialism as they have been forever, throw in something about trannys in the bathroom, and they will do their zombie things. Fuck this country and the idiots its created, seriously.

[brakeman 28,646]

Who do they think we are, MAGA?

[Aqua Buddha 14,782]

 

[Aqua Buddha 14,782]

Question for lawyers.  Since this very court established Oklahoma as a lawless wasteland with the McGirt decision, could the tribes in Oklahoma allow abortion and neither the state nor the feds have the ability to do anything about it?

[yoladu 4,187]

10 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Question for lawyers.  Since this very court established Oklahoma as a lawless wasteland with the McGirt decision, could the tribes in Oklahoma allow abortion and neither the state nor the feds have the ability to do anything about it?

Are you thinking what I am thinking? One stop shopping - casinos/clinics

I can see the WinStar ads now

[Neonmoon 38,130]

NSIAP

 

 

[hpslugga 4,096]

30 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Question for lawyers.  Since this very court established Oklahoma as a lawless wasteland with the McGirt decision, could the tribes in Oklahoma allow abortion and neither the state nor the feds have the ability to do anything about it?

Not a lawyer, don’t even play one on TV.

That being said, here’s one of Gorsuch’s comments from the McGirt majority opinion:

”Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for purposes of federal criminal law. Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word.”

Since the abortion ban is state law, I imagine the correct answer to your question is “McGirt does not apply.” 

That’s not to say the Oklahoma ban rightfully extends to reservations, but I imagine that would require separate cases to establish it…and that would go to Oklahoma courts, not SCOTUS. So best of luck on that one as their Supreme Court currently has 5 R’s and 4 D’s.

I freely admit that I could be absolutely wrong about this.

[DaysOff 8,157]

 

Thanks for flying the friendly skies.

[speed817 19,844]

 

[Aqua Buddha 14,782]

2 minutes ago, speed817 said:

 

Blessed be the fruit.

[Chooky 13,337]

9 minutes ago, speed817 said:

 

I think he's saying this out of insecurity on account of his face looking like a fetus.

[Jive Turkey 12,930]

 

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

I expect a lot of well reasoned arguments in the dissent as to why Roe vs. Wade and Planned Parenthood vs. Casey were correctly decided in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of the United States.

[Neonmoon 38,130]

Everyone should make plans to leave the dystopian nightmare

 

 

[Sbbruin 22,082]

3 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Everyone should make plans to leave the dystopian nightmare

 

 

Oh for fuck's sake.  

[wildcat09 29,555]

9 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Everyone should make plans to leave the dystopian nightmare

 

 

But but but but all the savvy people were saying this won't happen!

[Chewbacca 7,827]

15 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Everyone should make plans to leave the dystopian nightmare

 

 

Here's the thing - if Republicans truly believe abortion is murder, then you much charge the woman with a crime if she gets one, right?  Either it is or it isn't.  They're trying to walk some fine line saying it's murder but they don't support murder (or at least homicide) charges if an abortion is performed.  

[Horn Dog 10,156]

21 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Everyone should make plans to leave the dystopian nightmare

 

 

Well, that means contraceptives pills and IUDs are murder since they prevent implantation of a fertilized egg

[lemonlime 5,503]

3 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

Well, that means contraceptives pills and IUDs are murder since they prevent implantation of a fertilized egg

Also would end IVF treatments.

All this is a great way to fuck with women's healthcare for more than "just" abortions.  Who the fuck would want to practice as an OB/GYN in Louisiana and deal with this shit?

[Ojo Rojo 2,040]

27 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Everyone should make plans to leave the dystopian nightmare

 

 

To prove just how pro life they are, I think they should make this crime eligible for the death penalty.

[hpslugga 4,096]

27 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

Also would end IVF treatments.

All this is a great way to fuck with women's healthcare for more than "just" abortions.  Who the fuck would want to practice as an OB/GYN in Louisiana and deal with this shit?

Geez you almost say that as if to be shocked that republicans don't think about real world consequences about the ideologically constipated shit they do!

[lemonlime 5,503]

Just now, hpslugga said:

Geez you almost say that as if to be shocked that republicans don't think about real world consequences about the ideologically constipated shit they do!

I think they absolutely think about the real world consequences. They want the cruelty.  They want to shit upon poor women.  They know their wives and daughters have the money to get on a plane and go to NY or, after 2025 Mexico, and get whatever "concierge healthcare" (read basic women's healthcare) they want.  They give no fucks if their constituents die.

[TwiceHorn 31,983]

1 hour ago, hpslugga said:

Not a lawyer, don’t even play one on TV.

That being said, here’s one of Gorsuch’s comments from the McGirt majority opinion:

”Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for purposes of federal criminal law. Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word.”

Since the abortion ban is state law, I imagine the correct answer to your question is “McGirt does not apply.” 

That’s not to say the Oklahoma ban rightfully extends to reservations, but I imagine that would require separate cases to establish it…and that would go to Oklahoma courts, not SCOTUS. So best of luck on that one as their Supreme Court currently has 5 R’s and 4 D’s.

I freely admit that I could be absolutely wrong about this.

You have it backward.

As "Indian territory," only tribal and federal law apply.  Oklahoma state law has no effect, at least carrying McGirt to it's maximal extent.

[hpslugga 4,096]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

You have it backward.

As "Indian territory," only tribal and federal law apply.  Oklahoma state law has no effect, at least carrying McGirt to it's maximal extent.

Like I said, I could have been absolutely wrong about that. I stand corrected.

So since that appears to be the case, and since McGirt is the case law, does this preclude both the state and federal government from banning abortions performed on tribal lands?

Edited May 5, 2022 by hpslugga

[lemonlime 5,503]

It's similar to the anti-CRT nonsense.  It's not actually about CRT.  It's about creating vague, onerous laws that put teachers at risk of losing their career, being fined, or even going to jail for teaching, such that no one competent or sane would want to teach in public schools.  End result is a gutting of public education.  But the pols' kids will go to fancy private schools, so who gives a fuck.  Same here. Pass vague, cruel laws that make it all but impossible for OB/GYN's to practice.  Decimate women's health care in general, including access to abortion, but expanding out to any kind of healthcare.  The rich will still have access to healthcare elsewhere.

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2,692]

 

 

 

[TwiceHorn 31,983]

2 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

Like I said, I could have been absolutely wrong about that. I stand corrected.

So since that appears to be the case, and since McGirt is the case law, does this preclude both the state and federal government from banning abortions performed on tribal lands?

State yes, federal no, at least as far as criminal laws with criminal penalties.  Whether it extends to all laws is unclear.  And I think there's a notion of "tribal preemption" in there, as well.  That is, if tribal law permits abortion (or bans it) federal law cannot attempt to "undo" that.

[wildcat09 29,555]

This SCOTUS isn't going to let tribal lands become abortion havens. They'll just wave the magic wand that makes abortion laws different and say Oklahoma can enforce whatever they want on tribal land.

[MoJames 8,258]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

This SCOTUS isn't going to let tribal lands become abortion havens. They'll just wave the magic wand that makes abortion laws different and say Oklahoma can enforce whatever they want on tribal land.

[Beau Vine 55,813]

On 5/3/2022 at 10:58 PM, LTbear said:

Not at all. Durango - smallish town with incredible access to mountain wilderness areas - is the best town left in the state. Everywhere else, even the once cool little mountain towns, are absolutely overrun. 

I actually looked at Durango on realtor.com the other day.  Basically everything other than condos was $1+

[wildcat09 29,555]

9 minutes ago, MoJames said:

It will be once Dobbs is published. Alito's own opinion says so.

[Pods 7,622]

11 minutes ago, MoJames said:

It's not supposed to, but the GQP is playing Calvinball. It works however they say it does. 

Edited May 5, 2022 by Pods

[MoJames 8,258]

So my exposure to how Navajo Nation has been policed is it has it's own law enforcement and the FBI occasionally gets involved. At no point does anyone getting a paycheck from Arizona, New Mexico or Utah step into the equation. How is Oklahoma going to dictate how a sovereign nation or the FBI police themselves?

[Aqua Buddha 14,782]

The way McGirt has been interpreted in Oklahoma is that state/local law enforcement can’t even arrest a tribal member for even petty crime.  It’s solely up to either the feds or the tribes themselves.

[Ojo Rojo 2,040]

I've been searching for a silver lining to all of this.  The one thing I came up with is that many pro-choice advocates and legal scholars never liked Roe, including RBG herself, because they knew that tying legal abortion to the right to privacy was subject to attack. They were right and here we are now. RBG felt, as others did, that a stronger foundation for legal abortion would be based on gender discrimination.  Here is an article that explains it a little further:  https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/21/us/ruth-bader-ginsburg-roe-v-wade.html

My thought was, "Okay, now is the chance to go back and do this the way it should have been done from the beginning. Tie the right to a stronger constitutional basis." Except then I remembered that it doesn't matter how effective the argument, how perfectly the facts of a potential case would line up with constitutional guarantees or anything else other than the makeup of the court.  If there is a majority conservative SCOTUS then there will be no legal right to abortion in this country. Period. And it's going to be years before the balance of the court tips.

[lemonlime 5,503]

Irony is dead.

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11,669]

11 minutes ago, Ojo Rojo said:

I've been searching for a silver lining to all of this.  The one thing I came up with is that many pro-choice advocates and legal scholars never liked Roe, including RBG herself, because they knew that tying legal abortion to the right to privacy was subject to attack. They were right and here we are now. RBG felt, as others did, that a stronger foundation for legal abortion would be based on gender discrimination.  Here is an article that explains it a little further:  https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/21/us/ruth-bader-ginsburg-roe-v-wade.html

My thought was, "Okay, now is the chance to go back and do this the way it should have been done from the beginning. Tie the right to a stronger constitutional basis." Except then I remembered that it doesn't matter how effective the argument, how perfectly the facts of a potential case would line up with constitutional guarantees or anything else other than the makeup of the court.  If there is a majority conservative SCOTUS then there will be no legal right to abortion in this country. Period. And it's going to be years before the balance of the court tips.

i'd like to see what happens if scotus takes the direct route.  is there any case that has been reversed that was itself a reversal?  i can't think of any.  in 25 years, will scotus say "no, no.  we had it right in roe v wade after all."?    

[WhatTheBuck 28,904]

1 minute ago, lemonlime said:

Irony is dead.

“Hang Mike Pence! Hang Mike Pence! Hang Mike Pence!”

What an absolutely sniveling, groveling little piece of shit. I mean, this is who he’s always been. A wretched fundamentalist douchebag. But after having his life threatened by others who sold their souls (metaphorically speaking) to Trump just like he did, you’d think he would just shrink away and disappear from sight. Is there anyone who’s more pathetic than Mike Fucking Pence? He has Ted Cruz beat.

[atomheartbevo 90,542]

How long until they ban birth control?

Several of my Trump-loving family had absolutely no idea that Texas had become a minority-majority state and that whites were only around 40% of the state, and two of them bitched that whites weren't having enough babies.

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11,669]

6 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

How long until they ban birth control?

Several of my Trump-loving family had absolutely no idea that Texas had become a minority-majority state and that whites were only around 40% of the state, and two of them bitched that whites weren't having enough babies.

some fucking ceacescu shit.  people are going to have babies whether they want to or not!