14445655:Chunderface said:
I am pro choice and think women should have access to abortion services. I think it is shameful that any western country today wouldn't somehow protect the right at the highest level of the law. But remember that abortion services are still entirely safe and legal and will stay that way in the vast majority of states. From a policy perspective, the decision today is a fail. From a legal perspective, the decision today was very foreseeable.
What you're saying though is some alarmist purple-hair shit that doesn't help abortion rights advocates. I suggest you take the time to at least read the syllabus to today's opinion:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf
"SCOTUS not caring about what the majority of Americans want" The Court examined whether access to abortion pre-viability as described in Roe was a specific right found in the Constitution. Legal scholars from the entire political spectrum have criticized Roe as bad legal analysis that likely would eventually fail if scrutinized. That day came today. If you actually read Roe you can see the Court was all over the place and reaching hard to describe abortion as a right found in the Constitution. You can't create something out of nothing, even if the majority of Americans want it.
If the majority of Americans want access to abortion protected as a Constitutional right, rather than a just state right, they can and have always been able to do that through the legislative process. Its called an amendment. It is how the Supreme Court gets overruled when it will not overrule itself. It has been done many times.
**This post was edited on Jun 24th 2022 at 2:42:18pm
Bumping for emphasis. This was the only correct and legally relevant post in the whole thread. The rest is emotional nonsense that is frankly irrelevant. You point out what everyone is missing: whether you are pro-choice or pro-life or don't care, Roe was a bad ruling that should have been fixed a long time ago.
Most of the posts in this thread are copy/paste from major media or politicians. That's concerning, because almost none of that is true. Read the ruling, it's really not surprising in any way. It says like 15 times that contraceptives and gay marriage are not under fire and why (even though Clarence Thomas had the audacity to explain why the Federal Government shouldn't deal in that business either). You have a SCOTUS filled with conservative judges, which means you are going to see them lean away from empowering the federal government and pushing that responsibility to the States and Congress whenever a case lands on their desk. Honestly, we should all want that. It seems backwards when looking at cases you wish went the other way, but using the SCOTUS to essentially create law bypasses the voting process entirely.
That is not what happened here, though the news is saying so. It's the opposite. Imagine a crazy, hypothetical case going to the SCOTUS which tried to assert that anyone could punch a gay person because it was religious expression and the government couldn't stop it. That is obviously ridiculous by every measure and legal interpretation. If you were to believe Justice Sotomayor when she says the Constitution is fluid (but only when she agrees with it, and it isn't fluid...that's the point of the entire system), you would fear that the conservative majority would simply create a backdoor law by writing some BS in the concurrence that justifies it under the First Amendment and then supports forever because of precedent (even if that precedent was fucking dumb). That is what happened with Roe, and why the SCOTUS needs to interpret law without injecting their own wish list. If you look at the dozens of other cases these past couple years, almost ALL of them have gone in the liberal direction because this SCOTUS is majority conservative and won't chuck stuff out without a really good reason.
Roe was not based on the Constitution, the assertion that it was a right or is in there is proof that you just didn't read it. If we really think abortion is that important and the majority of people want it, we can pass it in Congress or in all the states. That isn't true, which is why it won't happen.
I lived in Europe for many many years, and the US is an outlier in its obsession with abortion and how late most states allow it to be done. This idea that its so popular doesn't add up. In my opinion, which again does not matter at all in relation to this case because it was trash from a legal perspective, is that it should be allowed but I am really uncomfortable with 26 weeks. It makes logical sense to me, but emotionally it makes me uncomfortable. Both my kids were born before 30 weeks, my best friend had their twins at 26 weeks. All are healthy and happy, and I see them when I think about the 26 week line. It makes me squirm a bit. The "until birth" line in New York is horrifying to me. That is some serious horror movie shit and I could not imagine being a part of that. Again, this is my opinion paragraph, which doesn't fucking matter when discussing law. Because we don't have a law about abortion, which is why Roe was overturned when a case was sent to the SCOTUS.
This will get downvoted and I'll be called a bigot or some stupid thing because you didn't read the decision or my post or study law ever, but it's an objective reality and not an emotional wish list I'm discussing.
