Personally, I think the Supreme Court will either rule in a very limited manner, saying that this ruling only applies to Mississippi, or have a broader ruling that leaves abortion in the hands of the States. Where it should be. The Constitution says nothing about abortion, it was not an assigned power or duty, hence, any regulation and legality is up to states. Since belief in abortion on demand is the most important belief to be a Democrat, they are worried. Would make it a lot harder for them to continue to have blacks kill their babies off in a higher percentage, because we know Democrats are black haters
Big changes to abortion law appear likely after oral arguments at Supreme Court in Mississippi case
The U.S. Supreme Court appears poised to dramatically weaken legal abortion protections — and it could completely overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling next summer — after oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization on Wednesday.
The state of Mississippi defended a law passed by its Legislature in 2018 that imposes a ban on abortion at 15 weeks of gestation, and it appeared likely that at least five of the nine justices would uphold It.
This means big changes are almost certain for the future of abortion, but it does not mean that Roe — the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that found a constitutional right to an abortion before fetal viability — is certain to be overturned in its entirety. The court could institute a nationwide ban at 15 weeks.
That’s doubtful, as the Court would then be making legislation. The Mississippi law was designed to be similar to the laws in most European nations, few of which allow abortion after 15-20 weeks. Most of the EU nations also have many regulations on the medical standards for abortion facilities, unlike here in America, where Democrats want them to have the same medical standards as a convenience store.
Yet there were plenty of indications that there might be five votes to overturn Roe entirely. In that case, most abortions would be illegal in roughly half the states while remaining legal in the other half, according to state abortion laws currently on the books.
The main question among legal observers before the court heard arguments was whether the majority-conservative court was more likely to overturn Roe completely or whether it would create a new standard for when abortion could remain legal.
Realistically, if they want full on overturn, it wouldn’t, shouldn’t, make it illegal: just return the power into the hands of the States. Hence, you could find states where it is illegal to get one, and states where it is legal. Perhaps Democrats would simply go back to pushing contraception? It wasn’t all that long ago where this was Important to them. So, what do Democrats do?
If Roe is gutted, Democrats are unlikely to make it law. But they’ll run on it.
If the Supreme Court overturns or guts abortion rights in a major case that was argued Wednesday, the Democratic-led Congress is unlikely to have the votes to counteract it legislatively.
The fallback plan, Democrats say, is to take the issue to voters in the 2022 elections and argue that Republican victories in Congress and states could fuel restrictions on or even outlaw abortions.
Even though many polls say it should be legal, once you start getting into the details things change. Like with the time frame, where the polls start to be evenly split in restricting after 15 weeks. When you start talking about late term abortions and treating abortion facilities like medical centers, the numbers trend away from the abortion believers in the Democratic Party. So, if Democrats want to push abortion for the mid-terms, I don’t think it will help.
The House passed the Women’s Health Protection Act in September to codify abortion rights nationally. But the bill is likely to face a dead end in the Senate, where Democrats have a 50-50 majority and need 60 votes to defeat a probable Republican filibuster. The bill has only 48 Senate co-sponsors, with two Democratic exceptions, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Wednesday that the House bill would get a vote in the Senate. “Abortion is a fundamental right. We will not let right-wing ideologies tell women what to do,” he said. “It won’t be an easy fight, but we will not back down.”
If they manage to pass it in the Senate, it will be sued immediately, since there is no actual federal responsibility for this, except, really, in saying that states cannot stop or penalize a woman crossing state lines to get one.
A Supreme Court decision is expected by the end of June, in the heat of the midterm elections. Oral arguments indicated that the six conservative justices on the nine-member court appeared willing to at least uphold the 15-week abortion ban in Mississippi, if not go a step further and overturn Roe v. Wade and its precedents.
So, for all the hoopla, we won’t know anything till June. Just from a Constitutional point of view, the Supreme Court should remove the federal government from the abortion debate, and leave it up to the states. No, that isn’t about morality. Yes, abortion is horrible. But, the foundation of our system is what it is, and has to be obeyed.
The thing is that Roe is very unlikely to be overturned, ever.
1. The Roberts court will find any legal needle in the haystack needed to keep from making a controversial decision or upset current legal status quo.
2. While Democrats are used to going out and getting activist judges, Conservatives get conservative judges. Conservative judges looks at the law as it is written, not the law as they wish it was written. Even full unanimous conservative panel of judges would still likely vote to keep the status quo, because that’s what being a conservative means. Conservative = Not activist.
Sure, Roe should be overturned. It’s just bad law. The Roe decision itself lays the seed for it’s own destruction in the “we might know more in the future about the nature of life” clause.
The verdict of Roe did not make Abortion a civil right. It acknowledged that medical privacy was a civil right. The same medical privacy that federal, state and local governments are strip-mining in the name of fighting COVID (but not HIV or Opioid addiction).
“Abortion is a fundamental right.”
No, it’s not.
“We will not let right-wing ideologies force women to think about the consequences of their actions”.
I could see a bit of editing was needed.
Think about it: abortion advocates are basically saying that women can’t control their urges, and thus need abortion to fix their mistakes.
alanstorm: abortion advocates are basically saying that women can’t control their urges
Women only rarely are impregnated on their own. The sperm donor should be identified and forced to care for the expectant mother and the resulting child.
Abortion banners are basically saying that men can’t control their urges, and thus need women to fix their mistakes.
The esteemed Mr Dowd wrote:
I absolutely agree!
Around 800,000 American babies are killed in the womb annually nowadays. About 570,000 are minorities with 295,000 of those being black. Of the approximately 280,000 white babies killed the vast majority are leftist Democrats as that is their mode of birth control. Very few of the actual abortions are of the people I personally want alive.
I vote for abortion. In fact I think we should pay minorities and Democrats to have them. The numbers don’t lie. The black population would currently be about 30% had the Democrats not instituted abortion. They finally got something right.
I’m with Elwood P. Dowd. Kill the black, colored and poor babies and keep the white man on top.
Brandon: Of the approximately 280,000 white babies killed the vast majority are leftist Democrats
Killing babies is murder and is against the law. Zygotes, embryos and fetuses are not babies. Why do anti-abortionistas tolerate ANY abortions if they feel it’s murder? Is a twelve week fetus less valuable to you than a 24 week fetus? Babies are those little humans that conservatives ignore.
According to 2014 data, 24% of abortion patients were Roman Catholic, 17% mainstream Protestant and 13% Evangelical. Half of abortion patients live below the poverty line. Almost all patients are between 18 and 30. Few are college grads.
We’re not surprised that Brandon wants to keep the white man on top by killing Blacks. Although mostly Brandon wants to control women’s behavior.
Elwood P. Dowd said: Zygotes, embryos and fetuses are not babies.
You are technically correct. Only babies are babies. Zygotes, embryos, fetuses and babies are just human beings at different stages of development like tots, teens, adults and geriatrics are. They’re all human beings.
Why do anti-abortionistas tolerate ANY abortions if they feel it’s murder? I don’t know Elwood. I’m on your side. Kill the zygotes, embryos, fetuses go man go.
Babies are those little humans that conservatives ignore.
See, you always overdo it. Why would you say something as obviously untrue as that? \Conservatives have more babies than do leftists Google it. They’re also happier and more generous people than those “compassionate” leftists. Google it.
We’re not surprised that Brandon wants to keep the white man on top by killing Blacks. Although mostly Brandon wants to control women’s behavior.
And Brandon is not surprised you agree with him. (You still keep saying “we” and I don’t know if you’re speaking for all the Democrat racists or just the communists). You should know I’m White as since I am White I of course want my people on top. If a White wants blacks or browns on top what does that say about the man’s intellect, rationality and loyalty to his tribe? After all we started the country. But I have no desire to control any woman’s behavior. Do you? Why would you suggest that by supporting a woman’s right to kill her zygote I want to control a woman’s behavior? Makes no sense.
You should be happy guys like me agree with you. Plus you get all the guys who just want to screw broads and walk away from them when they get pregnant. You know, the users and abusers of women. They just love abortion. Like you and I do. So we’re all on the same team. Maybe for different reasons but the same team nonetheless.
Don’t be afraid Elwood, embrace the Dark Side. You’re already there so enjoy the ride.
Here’s a chart of the body count Elwood:
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/usa_abortion_by_race.html
You’ve been at this a lot longer than I and man have you butchered you some colored kids! Kudos. You had some really great years where you guys were whacking 4-500,000 blacks a year. See the above chart. I guess if you can’t enslave them you may as well kill their offspring, right?. No reason to let the bastards spawn if you can’t put chains on them eh, Simon Legree?
BTW, Jeffery Epstein didn’t kill himself but Alec Baldwin should.
Brandon: Zygotes, embryos, fetuses and babies are just human beings at different stages of development like tots, teens, adults and geriatrics are.
Babies, tots, teens, adults and geriatrics are recognized as human beings, zygotes, embryos and fetuses are not.
Brandon: You should know I’m White as since I am White I of course want my people on top. If a White wants blacks or browns on top what does that say about the man’s intellect, rationality and loyalty to his tribe? After all we started the country.
My tribe? My tribe is American. Yours is caucasian-American? We doubt that you started the country.
Brandon thinks we’re of the same mind, but he wishes to exterminate Blacks, while we support a woman’s right to choose, whether Black or white. We’re perfectly happy if she chooses to spawn. We also support contraception access, public education, government support for parents, babies, tots and children if needed. In fact, we recommend all sorts of support for the poor and working classes, whether white or Black.
Every year Americans die from kidney, lung and liver failure where they could be saved by a transplant.
Should others be allowed to use your body against your will to donate blood, bone marrow, a kidney, lung or liver segment to save another life? Even after death, doctors need permission to harvest organs for transplant.
Yet, anti-abortionistas want to force women against their will to use their body to save another life.
Please note in advance. I am pro life and believe in life at inception. That’s me.
Having said that. I would really like the Court to overturn it for one reason.
The Court enacted a law with their ruling just as they did in the Yonkers school desegregation case. They created law mainly because the legislatures refused to do their jobs, right or wrong to enact a new law.
I would hope the Court if it does overturn it would point out that main fact. It was a mistake and throw it back to the loonies in Congress and have them do their job. We as Conservatives should demand the Court act by the rule of law, which does not allow them to create a law
One could argue that abortion is a federal matter, not something left to the States. It depends on how you define “personhood” and “life”. If the unborn are indeed alive, and persons, then under the fifth amendment they may not be deprived of life except by due process of law.
Roe v Wade held that unborn children are not legal persons; if the Court reverses that and states that they are legal persons, then abortion would become illegal in every state, because the killing of a person is murder.
Of course, there is precedent even before Roe in which the Supreme Court held that certain living human beings were not persons with full rights.
I’ve had this notion for a while that we need a “zeroth” amendment that would define some of the more ambiguous terms in the constitution. Like in this case, what is a “person” and “alive”. What is “unreasonable” in terms of search and seizure. What is a “natural born citizen” What is cruel and unusual punishment. What are “arms” for the purposes of the second… swords, pistols, full auto, nukes? I’m fairly sure I don’t trust the current gov to set any of those. Yet without such a thing it’s always coming down to legislating from the benh.
JimS,
I suspect the founding fathers left so much of our Constitution ambiguous to allow Congress and the Courts to interpret it consistent with the times.
Elwood,
Maybe so…. or perhaps they held the quaint notion that it wasn’t necessary to spell it out in such detail.
The Constitution is not that complex. It spells out in simplistic terms what the central government can do. If it is puzzling to a person, then you turn to the Federalist Papers. Under such, abortion is not something the central government can rule on. Thus it is under the authority of the state. Of course, Elwood or Jeff and the liberals/ communist use the Constitution as toilet paper.
Exactly, there was no reason to list the arms since they had no knowledge of what the future would hold. Aren’t we saying the same thing?
Anyway, you suggested more detail might be needed.
You say you know longer trust America to make the right decisions on these matters.
david or Teach use our Constitution to wipe their sorry asses.
We didn’t rule on Roe v Wade, our Supreme Court did.
david or Teach seem to think they are better judges than the Supreme Court judges, but they’re just regurgitating what they hear from legal hacks on FOX.
No one has the right to force another to sacrifice save someone’s life. If a kid needs a kidney to survive would you be OK being forced to give up one of yours?
… the legislatures refused to do their jobs, right or wrong to enact a new law.
Not exactly true. At the time of Roe v Wade, every state had valid laws governing abortion, as well as other medical practice. Activist courts not liking a law is not the same as “acting because legislatures wouldn’t”.
Further, Roe V Wade “legalized” abortion only insofar as it recognized the principle of medical privacy. A quaint concept that no longer applies to anything that isn’t related to abortion and gay diseases.
Overturning Roe only throws it back to the state legislatures, where it belongs. Just like the regulation of all other medical practice.