Kansas Crimson

Posted: **Mon May 02, 2022 9:29 pm**

no idea, who would gain from leaking a false court decision though?

Posted: **Mon May 02, 2022 10:09 pm**

The DC police? Get ahead of the inevitable protests? I seriously doubt that there is/was a leak but it’s reasonable to deduce that whatever decision came out of this group of hacks it would be to overturn. My speculation is 5-4 with Roberts voting with the minority in an attempt to hold up appearances while still getting what he actually wants

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 7:15 am**

There pretty clearly was/is a leak. I’ve read smart people make wildly different speculation over which side, and why. So, who the hell knows???

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 7:47 am**

Dems needing to motivate voters? CNN speculated about it this morning a bit.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 7:59 am**

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 7:47 am Dems needing to motivate voters? CNN speculated about it this morning a bit.

Dems needing to motivate voters, OR conservatives looking to seal a vulnerable majority.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 8:03 am**

5 questions!

1. haven’t Dems been floating the codification of a right to choose?

2. Has anyone read the whole thing? Or at least familiar with the legal rationale. I think they’re just saying abortion should be a state’s rights thing? Or should be decided by the legislators rather than the courts? Do they do anything to reconcile the previous right to privacy rationale of Roe?

3. on a de jure level, lulz, but on a de facto level this doesn’t change much does it? Or will it? Any state that wanted to make abortion difficult or illicit, already has, right?

4. do we get a dissenting opinion?

5. Where’s DCHawk when we need him?

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 8:13 am**

Also, I struggle with the court’s suggestion that the reason abortion is such a hot button thing is Roe itself, and not the conservative extremist moral mandates and outrage rhetoric that has been exhibited since at least the wake of Roe. More chicken and egg, maybe.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 8:25 am**

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 8:13 am Also, I struggle with the court’s suggestion that the reason abortion is such a hot button thing is Roe itself, and not the conservative extremist moral mandates and outrage rhetoric that has been exhibited since at least the wake of Roe. More chicken and egg, maybe.

I don't.

There have always been issues with Roe V Wade, even mentioned those who support the purpose of the ruling in theory.

I think your comment is true for many "regular people" who oppose it. But not the supreme court justices. I think they all take their job more seriously than that, and understand what their job is.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 8:36 am**

Isn’t the job of the justices to reflect the will of the people?

Or something. What is their job otherwise? I guess to interpret the constitution. Which is why I asked about the legalese of how they got there.

But Dems have had 50 years to codify Roe, right? Including how many times Dems controlled gummint. Why haven’t they?

Apparently such a bill passed the House last year, and is currently collecting dust in the Senate?

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 8:43 am**

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 8:25 am
ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 8:13 am Also, I struggle with the court’s suggestion that the reason abortion is such a hot button thing is Roe itself, and not the conservative extremist moral mandates and outrage rhetoric that has been exhibited since at least the wake of Roe. More chicken and egg, maybe.
I don't.

There have always been issues with Roe V Wade, even mentioned those who support the purpose of the ruling in theory.

I think your comment is true for many "regular people" who oppose it. But not the supreme court justices. I think they all take their job more seriously than that, and understand what their job is.

Oh, Gorsuch, Kavanugh and Barrett understand what their job is, yes they do.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 8:44 am**

flaws or not R v Wade took it out if the governments jurisdiction and was a guaranteed right.

Its a scary precedent for it to be overturned. There are no guaranteed rights.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 8:54 am**

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 8:43 am
BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 8:25 am
ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 8:13 am Also, I struggle with the court’s suggestion that the reason abortion is such a hot button thing is Roe itself, and not the conservative extremist moral mandates and outrage rhetoric that has been exhibited since at least the wake of Roe. More chicken and egg, maybe.
I don't.

There have always been issues with Roe V Wade, even mentioned those who support the purpose of the ruling in theory.

I think your comment is true for many "regular people" who oppose it. But not the supreme court justices. I think they all take their job more seriously than that, and understand what their job is.
Oh, Gorsuch, Kavanugh and Barrett understand what their job is, yes they do.

I am not nearly as cynical about ANY of the supreme court justices. Regardless of who nominated them.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 8:55 am**

There's a lot about this potential decision that is wrong (obviously), but here's something I thought about last night after seeing the breaking news -

Overturning Roe v. Wade has been the driving force for getting the Christian Right out of the pews and into the voting booths for the past 50 years, and it's essentially been THE ONLY platform for the past 20. So my question is this:

What is going to be the next thing to get them to the polls? And I don't ask that as a scare tactic for what's to come (there is some concern there though), but more along the lines of how are they going to motivate that relatively large portion of their base? Yeah, I know a small portion are inherently racist so the dog whistle stuff about CRT and immigration will always scare them enough to vote, but is there really something that's not full-on conspiracy theory level that will get them back to the polls?

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 8:57 am**

TDub wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 8:44 am There are no guaranteed rights.

That part is definitely scary.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 9:10 am**

kubowler99 wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 8:55 am There's a lot about this potential decision that is wrong (obviously), but here's something I thought about last night after seeing the breaking news -

Overturning Roe v. Wade has been the driving force for getting the Christian Right out of the pews and into the voting booths for the past 50 years, and it's essentially been THE ONLY platform for the past 20. So my question is this:

What is going to be the next thing to get them to the polls? And I don't ask that as a scare tactic for what's to come (there is some concern there though), but more along the lines of how are they going to motivate that relatively large portion of their base? Yeah, I know a small portion are inherently racist so the dog whistle stuff about CRT and immigration will always scare them enough to vote, but is there really something that's not full-on conspiracy theory level that will get them back to the polls?

Good point, and something I meant to mention.

Now that the base finally got their red meat, what do they have left?

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 9:14 am**

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 8:54 am
jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 8:43 am
BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 8:25 am
I don't.

There have always been issues with Roe V Wade, even mentioned those who support the purpose of the ruling in theory.

I think your comment is true for many "regular people" who oppose it. But not the supreme court justices. I think they all take their job more seriously than that, and understand what their job is.
Oh, Gorsuch, Kavanugh and Barrett understand what their job is, yes they do.
I am not nearly as cynical about ANY of the supreme court justices. Regardless of who nominated them.

Not sure what to tell you then.

All three were the ripest fruit from the Federalist Society tree. Two of the three were sham appointments (and the one that wasn't, was a really soft nominee).

Not to mention, one of the Court's nine members is - in the most charitable light - married to someone who conspired with a defeated president to subvert the 2020 election.

It's not good! And don't bother both-sidesing this one.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 9:17 am**

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 9:21 am**

Agree to disagree. That's okay. Or at least it used to be. Hyper partisans are never happy with whoever the other side nominates. It happened with the most recent nominee and she was a fantastic choice by Biden.

Liberals aren't going to like anyone associated with the Federalist Society because it is a conservative group. Makes sense. I am okay with people not liking some of the justices. I am not okay with people undermining the legitimacy of the supreme court. That is a dangerous path to go down just because you don't like that Trump got to nominate some of them.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 9:24 am**

kubowler99 wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 8:55 am There's a lot about this potential decision that is wrong (obviously), but here's something I thought about last night after seeing the breaking news -

Overturning Roe v. Wade has been the driving force for getting the Christian Right out of the pews and into the voting booths for the past 50 years, and it's essentially been THE ONLY platform for the past 20. So my question is this:

What is going to be the next thing to get them to the polls? And I don't ask that as a scare tactic for what's to come (there is some concern there though), but more along the lines of how are they going to motivate that relatively large portion of their base? Yeah, I know a small portion are inherently racist so the dog whistle stuff about CRT and immigration will always scare them enough to vote, but is there really something that's not full-on conspiracy theory level that will get them back to the polls?

gay marriage?

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2022 9:25 am**

If DC WUZ right, and this is just another both sides thing, and the lib assault on Citizens United is just like the con assault on Roe, I dunno if SCOTUS would have to put fences around the courthouse in anticipation of the decision.

I mean would anyone even protest it?

(Besides DCHawk himself)

Kansas Crimson

Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?

Re: Where's the Pro-Life thread?