Roe v. Wade: Gone Forever; Dobbs is here to stay.

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
Politico has published a draft opinion written by Samuel Alito that argues Roe should be overturned. This would return the issue to the states and eviserate a highly controversial, and, one may argue, a poorly drafted opinion.
 

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
The worst of it is a draft was leaked probably by a clerk of the Supreme Court. This was a massive breach of trust. No individual has the right to control decisions of the Supreme Court. This person is no hero. She or he will never be trusted, ever again.
 

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
Any legal basis for Roe was challenged immediately following its announcement even by scholars who support legal abortion.

In 1973, John Hart Ely, a professor of law at Yale Law School, writing in the Yale Law Journal said, Roe v. Wade is "a very bad decision...It is bad because it is bad constitutional law, or rather because it is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be."

The same year, Harvard law professor, Laurence Tribe wrote, "One of the most curious things about Roe is that, behind its own verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgment on which it rests is nowhere to be found."

Earlier this year, Benjamin Wittes, a Washington Post legal affairs writer noted, "Since its inception Roe has had a deep legitimacy problem, stemming from its weakness as a legal opinion."

Perhaps, most interesting of Roe's commentators is Edward Lazarus, a former law clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun, Roe's author. Lazarus, who describes himself as someone who loved Blackmun "like a grandfather" called Roe "one of the most intellectually suspect constitutional decisions of the modern era" and "a jurisprudential nightmare."
 

spider fan

Spider's Club
Dec 4, 2003
10,695
2,621
113
Egregious breach of protocol/decency/integrity for this decision to be leaked before it is announced. The perpetrator should be publicly identified and held accountable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BillyWayne

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
Many believe the perp is Amit Jain, clerk of Sotomayor, recent graduate from Yale Law School. He knows the Politico reporters and was a source for them before. Who can trust the guy ever again.
 
Dec 31, 2021
82
84
18
Shucks, I am still hoping it’s the QAnon insurrectionist.
Trust? Are you kidding me? Didn’t boofer beer boy and Amy Covid Barrett testify (so many would then add “under oath” but Uncle Earle Dunford would have none this redundancy ) Roe is the law of the land?
 

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
Honest pro-choice lawyers admit that Roe v. Wade was terrible jurisprudence. Here is a credible list. I remember reading commentary by Lawrence Tribe and Edward Lazarus while in Law School.
 
Dec 31, 2021
82
84
18
Yes pretzel logic but necessary due to inequitable enforcement by some knuckle dragging states. A doc here in Va a few years ago told me why the womens clinic was started after Roe. He knew emergency room interns at mcv who had to help a number of young women admitted for botched abortions. They “knew of ” at least one common name, a local physician. These women were single/poor and had no options. They also knew the “Windsor Farms” girls got to “vacation” in NYC.
I can’t wait for some TAM coed who has to go to Colorado for a “vacation” and her assisting family gets sued under Texas law for assisting. Even better if it’s the daughter of a legislator and the action is filed by an illegal (I’m for sealing the boarder). I really don’t wish Ill will on any individual only ill will on bad laws.
 

AnnapSpider

Graduate Assistant
May 8, 2003
4,057
1,079
113
Annapolis, MD
I’m not sure on what grounds a citizen can be sued by legal actions of another state. Unless we’re
deciding state lines don’t matter - sort of lIke we are suppose to accept that our national borders don‘t matter-
no law is broken by going to another state where abortionis legal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gallipoli
Dec 31, 2021
82
84
18
Back in September two out of staters filed an action inTexas against a Texas doctor who admitted in an WAPO opinion piece he performed an abortion. I do not know the outcome. To clarify my scenario, these two out of state persons or a citizen of Texas could file an action against the Texas parents, airline and any other entity in Texas who/that ASSISTS a women in obtaining an abortion. Missouri wants to extend that enforcement by punishing their citizens who travel out of state for abortion services and those who assist and those out of state providers. The overturn of Roe will never ‘outlaw’ abortions. It just makes them unsafe.
 

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
Yes pretzel logic but necessary due to inequitable enforcement.....
Correct, the logic was tortured. Good precedent would not lead to such instability. It would not, 50 years later, continue to inflame all parties and create intractable sides. Roe v. Wade has poisoned our national discourse. The absolutist positions of all sides are a direct result of Roe. It needs to go. The issue should be handled by the states, through the democratic process.
 
Aug 19, 2003
1,221
344
83
Odd the Trump haters don’t respond to your post. They must love the destruction this administration is delivering to our country.
 

KE Spider

Team Manager
Mar 8, 2010
1,555
2,310
113
Title 42 is expiring. Open borders here we come.
Respectfully disagree. The US border has been open since January 20, 2021.

An insult to all those seeking to enter the USA legally and to all US citizens.

A destructive policy, on many levels, with profound long term consequences cloaked in the guise of empathy and humanitarianism when mostly it is politically motivated.
 
Last edited:

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
Nice. A California man was arrested close to Brett Cavanaugh's home. He had tools to help him break in. He also had at least one gun and a knife. He admitted to police that he wanted to kill Justice Cavanaugh, because of the released opinion. Ummm, this is not the first and will not be the last time this occurs. His thinking is that it is best to kill a justice, so a majority cannot overturn Roe v. Wade.

 

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
This violence and intimidation towards the US Supreme Court is supported by the Biden Administration and Democratic Senators. More blood will be Biden's hands.
"Attorney General Garland has refused to enforce the law, while Democrats refuse to condemn confrontational protests against the justices."
 

AnnapSpider

Graduate Assistant
May 8, 2003
4,057
1,079
113
Annapolis, MD
I predict Roe v Wade will be overturned on Thursday June 30.
I predict they will throw it back to the States. Which seems to already be in the works, with some of the different
States blocking abortions, and others allowing them. RBG said that she felt the SCOTUS should have not ruled on
it.
 

KE Spider

Team Manager
Mar 8, 2010
1,555
2,310
113
Sensitive subject, but regardless of your view on abortion it is no where addressed in the Constitution. Roe v Wade made up a new right out of whole cloth. Read the opinion. Read the reasoning. Flaccid.

Personally, believe Bill Clinton said it best...abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. If you support abortion as the law of the land, do it properly...pass Federal legislation permitting it and quit bastardizing the Constitution by just making up s#%t. Otherwise, leave it to the prevailing community standards in each state.

Second thought on this subject....sick of hearing endless discussions about reproductive rights while reproductive responsibility is never mentioned.
 
Last edited:

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
This analysis makes a valid point. We can expect more attempts on the lives of Supreme Court Justices. This piece says the unthinkable.
"It is hard to imagine the devastating effect upon our already polarized society, its institutions, and the Constitution itself if someone were to murder a justice in cold blood and then reap the following rewards for the assassination:

  • Because Supreme Court rulings aren’t final until released, a 5-4 ruling to overturn Roe would immediately become a 4-4 opinion, thereby leaving Roe on the books.
  • The president who would get to replace the murdered justice would be Joe Biden, who has repeatedly said he is firmly committed to keeping Roe in place.
  • The Senate that would get to confirm Biden’s nominee would be the current Democratic-controlled one, and the Democratic Party is adamantly committed to upholding Roe.
In short, an assassination could lead to Roe being upheld rather than overturned in the short term, Biden and his Democratic allies being able to replace the murdered justice with one of Biden’s choosing ahead of the midterm elections, and Roe remaining a fixture in the constitutional firmament in the long term."
 

Eight Legger

Spider's Club
May 27, 2003
17,622
13,132
113
If you're suggesting that Biden is attempting to have the chief justice of the Supreme Court murdered, I would say you are stretching the bounds of reality.

As to the issue of abortion in general, I think I'm like many people who can see both sides of things. At face value, I don't like the idea of ending a life before it begins. At the same time, I realize that there are times when it is necessary to save the mother's life, or prudent (in the case of sexual assault, for example). I think it needs to exist in a legal form, but I don't think it should be used as after-the-fact birth control late in the game.

I would say that if it becomes illegal federally and then in some states, there better be some funding lined up to take care of the women who attempt abortions in unauthorized ways anyway – and to care for the children who are born and then given up.
 

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
According to Ruth Bader Ginsberg, the better argument for abortion would have been on Equal Protection grounds, rather than prenumbral rights,
 

spider fan

Spider's Club
Dec 4, 2003
10,695
2,621
113
Biden needs to have added to his cue card: "We respect the rule of law that governs our country. While all may not agree with the decisions of the Supreme Court the Judicial Branch is an integral part of our system of govrenment and we should peacefully respect their decisions."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gallipoli

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
Biden needs to have added to his cue card: "We respect the rule of law that governs our country. While all may not agree with the decisions of the Supreme Court the Judicial Branch is an integral part of our system of govrenment and we should peacefully respect their decisions."
Absolutely. There is no need for violence. There is also no need to pack the court.
 

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
The concept of stare decisis should not apply. Neither Roe nor Casy settled the abortion issue.
Abortion continues to poison American politics. States continued to pass laws challenging the logic of Roe and Casey. When a ruling is still controversial and unworkable after five decades, that is compelling evidence it was wrongly decided.
 

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
One wonders why the LGBT community is concerned about abortion rights? One may ask why these groups are concerned about what happens to a traditional baby inside a traditional woman? How do these groups have a vested interest in the issue?
 

Eight Legger

Spider's Club
May 27, 2003
17,622
13,132
113
Lesbians are quite capable of having babies, in case you didn't know. And anyone is capable of having an opinion about abortion. What does sexual orientation have to do with that?

"Traditonal" babies and women? You sound like Queally talking about "regular" students.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WCUR11
Dec 31, 2021
82
84
18
Roe? Why the overrun matters.
The Neanderthal states who rejoice in the emotion of a Pyrrhic victory of insane restrictions and no exceptions fail to consider science. Mother Nature never guarantees any result for climate or births, et al. There is a need for a national reproductive and womens health law to protect womens health at every economic, social and educational level. Convention planners are already advising clients who may have pregnant attendees to consider the states health access services in case of emergency.
Below is a link to a study. The study notes these women and their significant others (I add this as the pregnant women are not the only parties affected) were fortunate to have access to medical care early in. One is noted as not being seen in first trimester. Think of the great numbers of women who do not have this healthcare access.


I also am including an abstract on placental abruption. There was a story circulating last week about an American couple overseas in a country where complete womens health care is legally not available and the wife’s placenta detached putting the pregnancy and her life at risk. I do not know the outcome as last I read they were sitting in a hospital emergency room waiting for a miscarriage or the wife showing health failure before the hospital could legally offer services.

 

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
Lesbians are quite capable of having babies, in case you didn't know. And anyone is capable of having an opinion about abortion. What does sexual orientation have to do with that?

"Traditonal" babies and women? You sound like Queally talking about "regular" students.
You have made my point. So if a lesbian gets pregnant, it would have to be through IVF. Why would two women want to abort, if they go through that? The only reason they protest is because they want to yell at someone. The issue of abortion is so heated that people get so outraged, even when it won't affect them personally. That was what was wrong with Roe.
 

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
Abortion should be handled by the people, through compromise. The people in Mississippi or Pennsylvania are different from those in California. Let each state choose. It's not perfect, but I trust democracy. I trust the people.
 
Dec 31, 2021
82
84
18
Women in Mississippi, Pennsylvania and California are biologically the same. Would you want any of your medical procedures decided by the people through compromise or by you and your physician? Would you want your prostate treatment options be limited through compromise?
 

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
Women in Mississippi, Pennsylvania and California are biologically the same. Would you want any of your medical procedures decided by the people through compromise or by you and your physician?
This supports my point. People scream and yell, because they want to. There is anger and vitriol in the debate. Do you think the lives of the unborn are not important? Should a child whose head has crowned be aborted? Ralph Northum suggested his support to let a newly born infant die after its birth. Even Harry Blackmun in Roe v. Wade weighed the interests of the state in protecting the unborn against the right to choose an abortion. Let our General Assembly debate this issue. This is an important moral decision that should left to the people. The balance will now be determined on a state by state basis.
 

Eight Legger

Spider's Club
May 27, 2003
17,622
13,132
113
You have made my point. So if a lesbian gets pregnant, it would have to be through IVF. Why would two women want to abort, if they go through that? The only reason they protest is because they want to yell at someone. The issue of abortion is so heated that people get so outraged, even when it won't affect them personally. That was what was wrong with Roe.
For many of the same reasons straight women do: a pregnancy-related issue that threatens the life of the mother or the viability of the child; birth defects; a change in life situation that makes parenthood less possible, etc. There are plenty of reasons, and your ignorance of them does not mean they don’t exist.

I’m not personally a proponent of abortion, but it needs to be an option in a variety of situations for all women. I dont think an abortion at 5 weeks is the same thing as one at 35 weeks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gallipoli
Feb 23, 2015
67
58
18
You have made my point. So if a lesbian gets pregnant, it would have to be through IVF. Why would two women want to abort, if they go through that? The only reason they protest is because they want to yell at someone. The issue of abortion is so heated that people get so outraged, even when it won't affect them personally. That was what was wrong with Roe.
...you sure you have a basic understanding of how human reproduction works? There are many ways women can get pregnant that aren't voluntary or elective like IVF... rape & incest are two such ways that have nothing to do with a person's sexual preference or orientation. And many of the states have now decided that if a woman gets pregnant by a rapist or by an incestual relative, she will have to deliver that baby. Not to mention that abortion is a form of necessary healthcare for pregnancy complications.

Government should not be in people's bodies, living rooms, bedrooms, places of religious worship, etc. I thought Republicans were all for small government and not involving themselves in the personal freedoms and liberties Americans deserve and are entitled to as citizens? That's what was such a cry about the government requiring masks during Covid... but if it's about controlling women, sure! Why not have a little forced birth, as a treat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eight Legger

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
3,140
1,733
113
The Doghouse
...you sure you have a basic understanding of how human reproduction works? There are many ways women can get pregnant that aren't voluntary or elective like IVF... rape & incest are two such ways that have nothing to do with a person's sexual preference or orientation. And many of the states have now decided that if a woman gets pregnant by a rapist or by an incestual relative, she will have to deliver that baby. Not to mention that abortion is a form of necessary healthcare for pregnancy complications.
These are valid points, the issues are too numerous for nine unelected justices to decide. The Court effectively ruled that it is not in the business of deciding these issues. When does a state have no interest in the health of a baby? Does the state have no interest if a baby crowns and the mother elects to abort the baby (the Ralph Northam position)? What if the mother and father were irresponsible. What if she gets pregnant and they wait until two weeks before the due date and decide to abort the child? They went before a judge and got approval for her to have an abortion (true story). Should they have the right to abort that child? What about that baby's rights? What if a 15-year old girl gets pregnant, should her parents know? How can any judicial body administer these issues? In this great republic, how can one size fit all?