Supreme Court Justice Kennedy to Retire at the end of July

[troph 25,267]

In comparison to moderate Texas where the woman has be watch an ultrasound of the fetus before getting an abortion.

But this is perfectly constitutional. No we can refuse to disclose all medical options and we get to pressure you and bully you to chose other than abortion in the name of God, but a requirement to just give all information so a woman can make an informed decision - the bedrock of healthcare decisions - is unconstitutional.

I’m sooo fucking whackadoo!!! Off the rezzie!! Libatard crazie!!!

[Fozzz 152]

4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

yes

At least you're honest about being a segregationist.  

Edited June 28, 2018 by Fozzz

[used2b 249]

Maybe a stricter constructionist SCOTUS will eventually get more people to vote for Dems who will pass laws relating to the protections they take for granted because of the courts. Trump is packing the lower courts with conservatives right now anyway.

Also - keeping his seat open and delaying the vote will just get more R's to the polls in November IMO. That is how Trump won.

[BabaYaga 15,632]

5 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

At least you're honest about being a segregationist.  

So you think it was an example of restraint?

[troph 25,267]

I'm generally curious. Unpack that statement a bit.
Full disclosure: I'm fascinated by SCOTUS. The history, the implication on our daily life, etc. 

Gerrymandering cases and the travel ban predominately, but the union case too.

As for daily life it depends — roe, marriage equality, religious freedom/discrim cases coming soon, etc all up for grabs. The current groups in the cross hairs are lgbtq and immigrants. Yeah daily life implications for sure.

[Fozzz 152]

I think restraint/activism is a poor framework for interpreting the constitution.  Originalism provides plenty of flexibility for achieving the desired ideological ends of the justices who practice it.  

[troph 25,267]

I'm generally curious. Unpack that statement a bit.
Full disclosure: I'm fascinated by SCOTUS. The history, the implication on our daily life, etc. 

And my view is the courts and gerrymandering is how the republicans will maintain control for longer than the public polls will suggest they should. 55/45 is a lot harder to achieve than 51/49 and then with a 20 blockade at the SCOTUS (Thomas is 70) that makes for a firebreak for some time unless Congress and the WH is fully controlled by dems and even then the unconstitutional law argument remains available with a conservative court.

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

5 minutes ago, troph said:

Gerrymandering cases and the travel ban predominately, but the union case too.

As for daily life it depends — roe, marriage equality, religious freedom/discrim cases coming soon, etc all up for grabs. The current groups in the cross hairs are lgbtq and immigrants. Yeah daily life implications for sure.

I do think we are going to see some interesting cases coming up. The "cake" case is the tip of the iceberg. Generally, I believe the Court has ruled in favor of the rights of the individual vs. the rights of the government. However, the court is going to be forced to rule on cases where the rights of the Individual are pitted against the rights of the Individual (IE religious liberty vs. sexual orientation). It will be interesting to see how The Roberts Court rules.

[JimmyHoffa 1,188]

21 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

If Roe isn't in jeopardy, what's the point of voting R based on the prospect of appointing anti-abortion Justices? 

???

There are plenty of people that are pro choice that vote GOP for other reasons. Same for those who tend to vote for Dems but don't have the same view on a certain topic. 

The great majority of people who vote in this country don't vote right or left on a single issue. 

[troph 25,267]

Standing alone I’m torn on the cake case, it’s a bigger issue so I’m frustrated by the ruling and yes the rulings Kennedy was most reliably with the left were the gay rights cases - he wrote 4 of them including lawerence and marriage equality. So I’m gravely concerned and expect right leaning rulings without exception. He had decisions like citizens united and hobby lobby that I think are disasters too.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

4 minutes ago, JimmyHoffa said:

???

There are plenty of people that are pro choice that vote GOP for other reasons. Same for those who tend to vote for Dems but don't have the same view on a certain topic. 

The great majority of people who vote in this country don't vote right or left on a single issue. 

Ok, but I'm asking specifically about the single issue voters.  

[troph 25,267]

???
There are plenty of people that are pro choice that vote GOP for other reasons. Same for those who tend to vote for Dems but don't have the same view on a certain topic. 
The great majority of people who vote in this country don't vote right or left on a single issue. 

I doubt roe is overturned but every case for restrictions that is argued on medical restrictions vs constitutional grounds of access will be decided on ideological lines to such a degree that abortion will be essentially legal but unavailable. Think how the recent Texas laws impacted access and had they been ruled constitutional.

[ChiTownDoc 21,362]

31 minutes ago, JimmyHoffa said:

 

This. It's a layup for lazy journalists and obviously an easy rally cry for those on the left to rile up the already "turned up to 11" base. 

Don't get me wrong the right does this all the time as well. It's an over reaction based on scare tactics, in many/most cases that never even come close to actually happening. 

 

The left will fuck this up.  That’s the only thing you can count on. 

[jimmyjazz 47,360]

11 minutes ago, JimmyHoffa said:

???

There are plenty of people that are pro choice that vote GOP for other reasons. Same for those who tend to vote for Dems but don't have the same view on a certain topic. 

The great majority of people who vote in this country don't vote right or left on a single issue. 

A shit ton of people vote R exclusively because of abortion.

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

8 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

A shit ton of people vote R exclusively because of abortion.

I think that number is smaller than you've been led to believe.

[jimmyjazz 47,360]

Maybe so but I have probably a half dozen conservative friends who have said they only voted Trump because of the abortion issue.  They admittedly just held their nose and cast their vote. 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

5 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

I think that number is smaller than you've been led to believe.

Exclusively is a strong word, because there are always other issues too.   But I think there is a very substantial percentage of Republicans who would never, ever vote for a Dem based purely on abortion, regardless of every other issue.  And that makes them single-issue voters, even if they have other reasons to support a particular R candidate. 

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

6 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Maybe so but I have probably a half dozen conservative friends who have said they only voted Trump because of the abortion issue.  They admittedly just held their nose and cast their vote. 

They voted for Trump because of abortion? Wow. You need better friends.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

No, we need better Republicans. 

[jimmyjazz 47,360]

5 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

They voted for Trump because of abortion? Wow. You need better friends.

Well, they voted R because of abortion.  They always have and always will.  Catholic.  (Not Hispanic.)

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

7 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

The left will fuck this up.  That’s the only thing you can count on. 

I know this is going to be rejected but the left has been fighting with one hand tied behind their back for a while.  They don’t have an unapologetic weaponized cable news channel to change public perception and work for them.  

Yeah CNN and MSNBC lean left plenty but they try to appeal to all audiences.  Fox News embraces their right wing appeal and is now being utilized by the Republicans to interfere in ongoing law enforcement investigations. That’s insane. 

The left never went that far with investigations into democrats.  They would usually just ignore them because there wasn’t much there to report.

Either Fox News needs to move to the center or a MSM outlet needs to emerge unapologetically hard left.  The latter wouldn’t be good for society but it’s the only way to level the playing field.

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

7 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Exclusively is a strong word, because there are always other issues too.   But I think there is a very substantial percentage of Republicans who would never, ever vote for a Dem based purely on abortion, regardless of every other issue.  And that makes them single-issue voters, even if they have other reasons to support a particular R candidate. 

Gallup shows a pretty consistent 18% believe in "Zero abortions". That doesn't seem substantial even if 100% of them were single issue voters.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

6 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Well, they voted R because of abortion.  They always have and always will.  Catholic.  (Not Hispanic.)

Funny, most of my Catholic friends are hard core Dems.

[Chuckie Finster 23,113]

10 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

They voted for Trump because of abortion? Wow. You need better friends.

Your surprise at this statement makes me think the number is actually larger than you've been led to believe, because I know a fair amount as well.

Hell, it was the very argument Tahoe brought to the board as to why a significant chunk of Alabama would vote for a child molester over a Democrat.

 

Edited June 28, 2018 by Chuckie Finster

[jimmyjazz 47,360]

5 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Funny, most of my Catholic friends are hard core Dems.

Yep, same here.  But for some abortion is the key issue.

[used2b 249]

5 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Yep, same here.  But for some abortion is the key issue.

The people I know who vote on this single issue truly believe they will go to hell if they vote any other way.

[jimmyjazz 47,360]

8 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I know this is going to be rejected but the left has been fighting with one hand tied behind their back for a while.  They don’t have an unapologetic weaponized cable news channel to change public perception and work for them.  

Yeah CNN and MSNBC lean left plenty but they try to appeal to all audiences.  Fox News embraces their right wing appeal and is now being utilized by the Republicans to interfere in ongoing law enforcement investigations. That’s insane. 

The left never went that far with investigations into democrats.  They would usually just ignore them because there wasn’t much there to report.

Either Fox News needs to move to the center or a MSM outlet needs to emerge unapologetically hard left.  The latter wouldn’t be good for society but it’s the only way to level the playing field.

You're actually right.  I know you'll get excoriated for it, but this goes hand in hand with what I said the other day when Johnny Sack went off the rails.  The left (and Dems) have for too long tried to play nice and cross the aisle, at least most of the time, and it does nothing but backfire.  The right wing plays dirty as a matter of principle and just laughs at the left's persistent need to be "fair".  It is quite frankly long past the point where this needs to stop.  Fuck 'em.

[David Dennison 19,573]

Those of you who believe Roe won't be overturned by a Supreme Court with five conservative justices are being way too optimistic. Your only hope is Roberts. He might side with the liberals for the sake of precedent, but I wouldn't bet on it and here's why: one of the things Constitutional law professors focus on when lecturing about Roe is that it is an example of an incredibly poorly reasoned decision, the argument being that Justice Blackmun and the majority bent over backwards in their reading of the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to give Constitutional cover for women seeking to terminate a pregnancy. Those on the right will go further and argue that the very right to privacy which underpins the decision was made up out of whole cloth. Because it is widely regarded as such a poorly reasoned legal decision, it is extremely vulnerable and always has been, 7-2 vote notwithstanding.

I hope that John Roberts is enough of a traditionalist to keep a 50 year precedent in place. If not, Roe v. Wade will be overturned and the issue will return to the states.

[used2b 249]

5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Those of you who believe Roe won't be overturned by a Supreme Court with five conservative justices are being way too optimistic. Your only hope is Roberts. He might side with the liberals for the sake of precedent, but I wouldn't bet on it and here's why: one of the things Constitutional law professors focus on when lecturing about Roe is that it is an example of an incredibly poorly reasoned decision, the argument being that Justice Blackmun and the majority bent over backwards in their reading of the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to give Constitutional cover for women seeking to terminate a pregnancy. Those on the right will go further and argue that the very right to privacy which underpins the decision was made up out of whole cloth. Because it is widely regarded as such a poorly reasoned legal decision, it is extremely vulnerable and always has been, 7-2 vote notwithstanding.

I hope that John Roberts is enough of a traditionalist to keep a 50 year precedent in place. If not, Roe v. Wade will be overturned and the issue will return to the states.

Correct.

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

6 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Your surprise at this statement makes me think the number is actually larger than you've been led to believe, because I know a fair amount as well.

Hell, it was the very argument Tahoe brought to the board as to why most of Alabama would vote for a child molester over a Democrat.

 

Maybe I just can't wrap my head around those who believe Trump has ANY standard that would align with those who consider themselves religious.

I can see the "He's better than Hillary even though I hate him" argument. Or maybe I just don't understand the depth that "Christians" will sink to get their agenda pushed.

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

7 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

You're actually right.  I know you'll get excoriated for it, but this goes hand in hand with what I said the other day when Johnny Sack went off the rails.  The left (and Dems) have for too long tried to play nice and cross the aisle, at least most of the time, and it does nothing but backfire.  The right wing plays dirty as a matter of principle and just laughs at the left's persistent need to be "fair".  It is quite frankly long past the point where this needs to stop.  Fuck 'em.

FWIW, I heard the Right making those same claims during Obama. I think when you are losing, you blame the refs. 

[Fozzz 152]

4 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Or maybe I just don't understand the depth that "Christians" will sink to get their agenda pushed.

This should help with that.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/30/alabamians-vote-roy-moore/

[jimmyjazz 47,360]

I think they see a Republican POTUS as a better chance to load SCOTUS with conservative justices, which is a pretty logical perspective.  We're seeing it play out.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

13 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Gallup shows a pretty consistent 18% believe in "Zero abortions". That doesn't seem substantial even if 100% of them were single issue voters.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

You're falsely conflating the significance of the abortion issue to a voter with the severity of the abortion policy the voter favors.  For example, it's a reasonable moral choice to be against abortion in all cases except where necessary to save the life of the mother, and entirely possible for a person with that belief to be a single-issue abortion voter. 

[pdmd_api 11]

7 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Maybe I just can't wrap my head around those who believe Trump has ANY standard that would align with those who consider themselves religious.

I can see the "He's better than Hillary even though I hate him" argument. Or maybe I just don't understand the depth that "Christians" will sink to get their agenda pushed.

Have you been to the South? There are hordes and hordes of "religious" people (not Catholic) that seriously think any Republican candidate will be guided by God's will, even a genuinely evil human being like Trump. It's fucking disgusting and why I've come to hate religion in general.

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

5 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I think they see a Republican POTUS as a better chance to load SCOTUS with conservative justices, which is a pretty logical perspective.  We're seeing it play out.

I agree with this. IMNSHO Roe is a small % of this. Most are concerned with an "activist" court (despite the fact that they have no clue what that means).

[troph 25,267]

I think that number is smaller than you've been led to believe.

When I was an evangelical it was THE issue that would not allow a person to vote for Dems despite some believers thinking Dems had the upper hand on other moral issues. There is a huge voting block on the right that votes solely on abortion.

[Js1 87,317]

8 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Maybe I just can't wrap my head around those who believe Trump has ANY standard that would align with those who consider themselves religious.

I can see the "He's better than Hillary even though I hate him" argument. Or maybe I just don't understand the depth that "Christians" will sink to get their agenda pushed.

Yeah, you clearly don't understand the depth Christians will go to get their agenda passed.  They'll latch on to whoever gives them the lip service at the altar of abortion.  Hucksters, shysters, con men - whomever invokes God, gays, guns and abortions will get their vote. 

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

7 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

You're falsely conflating the significance of the abortion issue to a voter with the severity of the abortion policy the voter favors.  For example, it's a reasonable moral choice to be against abortion in all cases except where necessary to save the life of the mother, and entirely possible for a person with that belief to be a single-issue abortion voter. 

Not sure I follow you. Even if those 18% were single issue voters, that's a pretty small number.

[lemonlime 5,503]

 

5 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

I agree with this. IMNSHO Roe is a small % of this. Most are concerned with an "activist" court (despite the fact that they have no clue what that means).

"Activist" means voting in a way they don't like.  That's it.   They aren't truly concerned with having an "activist court."  They're just using those fancy buzzwords to justify voting for some combo of Trump, Roy Moore, Steve King, et al

[CooterBrown 18,289]

1 hour ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Yeah, we've all got that nutjob on Facebook who posts abortion propaganda, but that's not the majority.

I have a "friend" like that. So, I started donating to Planned Parenthood in her name. I use a VISA gift card to donate so there's no paper trail to me (it's my wife's college friend). As a result, she gets a notification that a donation was made in her honor to PP and she gets all their mailings.  It's great seeing her lose her shit on social media when it happens. 

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

6 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Yeah, you clearly don't understand the depth Christians will go to get their agenda passed.  They'll latch on to whoever gives them the lip service at the altar of abortion.  Hucksters, shysters, con men - whomever invokes God, gays, guns and abortions will get their vote. 

Possibly. I'm not convinced that the filth spewed by the minority has any impact on the majority.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

5 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Not sure I follow you. Even if those 18% were single issue voters, that's a pretty small number.

You don't need to believe in zero abortions to be a single-issue abortion voter.   You can fall within the 50% of that poll that would permit some abortions and still never vote for a Dem because you want to outlaw them in most cases. 

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

6 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

 

"Activist" means voting in a way they don't like.  That's it.   They aren't truly concerned with having an "activist court."  They're just using those fancy buzzwords to justify voting for some combo of Trump, Roy Moore, Steve King, et al

No question. It's a dog whistle. 

I think the majority of Americans prefer a conservative court (IE a court that leans on "original intent") vs. a liberal one. But you are correct, it's "activist" when it doesn't rule the way they want.

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

5 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

You don't need to believe in zero abortions to be a single-issue abortion voter.   You can fall within the 50% of that poll that would permit some abortions and still never vote for a Dem because you want to outlaw them in most cases. 

Ah. Got ya. That makes sense.

[troph 25,267]

Not sure I follow you. Even if those 18% were single issue voters, that's a pretty small number.

Many many more are anti-abortion with limited exceptions and they are single issue voters on abortion. Evangelicals are staunchly against abortion with a heated debate over no exceptions or limited exceptions (rape, incest, health of mother) and those two groups far exceed 18%. Those groups plus evangelical overlay is probably north of 30%.

[Cheeseweasel 26,443]

Good discussion guys. I appreciate everyone's input.

[jimmyjazz 47,360]

10 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Yeah, you clearly don't understand the depth Christians will go to get their agenda passed.  They'll latch on to whoever gives them the lip service at the altar of abortion.  Hucksters, shysters, con men - whomever invokes God, gays, guns and abortions will get their vote. 

Not all Christians.  (Ahem.)

[jimmyjazz 47,360]

10 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

 

"Activist" means voting in a way they don't like.  That's it.   They aren't truly concerned with having an "activist court."  They're just using those fancy buzzwords to justify voting for some combo of Trump, Roy Moore, Steve King, et al

More to the point, judicial activism that serves the right would be perfectly fine.

[JBJ 3,830]

10 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

I think the majority of Americans prefer a conservative court (IE a court that leans on "original intent") vs. a liberal one. But you are correct, it's "activist" when it doesn't rule the way they want.

There were liberal orginalists before there were conservative ones.  America favors a conservative court because we haven't had a good liberal judge in a while.

Edited June 28, 2018 by JBJ