-
Roe v. Wade overturned
-
Quote from Chirorad84
Probably the best way to ban assault weapons is to put it on the referendum
Stay tuned
Yeah, except that one is in the constitution (the AR15), the other is not (killing babies). So even if you pass an unconstituional law via referendum, its not gonna hold up in the courts. Federal supremacy and stuff, you know the concept that allowed Eisenhower to send paratroopers to force a state to do things it didn’t want to do.-
An AR15 is not in the constitution
-
Is alcohol in the constitution?
Remember that was banned
-
Originalism allows citizens to own & openly display all the flintlocks they like.
As for abortion, well see how Supremes ignore Judaic religious beliefs for their standard Christian religion.
-
As for Eisenhower, that was Little Rock & states rights denying Black students to enroll in high school.
The very idea, Black kids in school & using Federal troops to fight violent racism!
[link=https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/1957-dwight-eisenhower-address-little-rock/]https://www.blackpast.org…r-address-little-rock/[/link]
-
Well I guess if Anyone wished to own an M61 or a GAU-8 Avenger then that is in the constitution too according to the wing nuts
-
Howitzer?
2nd Amendment right!
There can be no limits against the 2nd Amendment because it Constitutionally allows for the violent overthrow of the government, making it legal. Originalism intent.-
A podcast illustrating the wisdom or lack of turning the question over to the states. Chaos at best.Nobody know WTF they are allowed to do with patients who require care.
[link=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/11/opinion/abortion-roe-health-care-event.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage§ion=Explore%20Times%20Events]https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/11/opinion/abortion-roe-health-care-event.html[/link]
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
[h1][b]Louisiana Woman Forced Carry Headless Fetus to Term[/b][/h1]
A Louisiana mother has a week to make an unthinkable decision carry her baby to term even though she says doctors tell her it will not survive or find another state where she can have an abortion, [link=https://www.wafb.com/2022/08/15/mother-claims-she-was-denied-an-abortion-despite-babys-condition/]WAFB[/link] reports.
Said the woman: It was an abnormal ultrasound, and they noticed the top of the babys head was missing and the skull was missing, the top of the skull was missing.
She added: Its hard knowing that you know Im carrying it to bury it._____________
[h1][b]Girl Denied Abortion Because Shes Not Mature Enough[/b][/h1]
A Florida appeals court affirmed an order prohibiting a parentless 16-year-old from terminating her pregnancy on the grounds that she has not proven that she is sufficiently mature to decide whether to terminate her pregnancy, [link=https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1559541026695544833?s=20&t=mUkKtKRyO_aTeC6ya7kkdg]Slate[/link] reports.
Florida appeals court affirms an order prohibiting a parentless 16-year-old from terminating her pregnancy on the grounds that she has not proved she is mature enough to get an abortion. So the state will force her to have a child instead. https://t.co/1UqnPUErG0 pic.twitter.com/z8uMmAoxub
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) August 16, 2022
-
[h2][link=https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3613721-several-states-see-surge-in-women-registering-to-vote-following-supreme-court-abortion-ruling/]Several states see surge in women registering to vote following Supreme Court abortion ruling[/link][/h2]
In Kansas, women out-registered men by 40 percent, making 70 percent of all new registrants women. Earlier this month, voters in the state rejected a proposed amendment that would have paved the way for the Republican-led state legislature to ban the procedure.
In Michigan, where legal battles are taking place over abortion rights, women out-registered men by 8.1 percent since the Supreme Courts June 24 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization.
In Wisconsin, where [link=https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/940/i/04]it is now a felony[/link] for virtually any abortion to be performed, except in instances where it is needed to save the mothers life, women have out-registered men by 15.6 percent since the Supreme Courts decision.
In Louisiana, women outpaced men in new registrations by 13 percent since the decision, while in Pennsylvania, women out-registered men by 12 percent.
[/QUOTE]
-
[link=https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3613973-federal-judge-in-texas-blocks-biden-administrations-emergency-abortion-guidance/]https://thehill.com/polic…ncy-abortion-guidance/[/link]
Federal Judge bocks Biden guidance suggesting states could use EMTALA to get around state abortion restrictions in emergency cases-
[h1][b]Judge Blocks Part of Idahos Abortion Law[/b][/h1]
The Biden administration on Wednesday scored its first legal victory since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, convincing a judge to block the portion of an Idaho law that criminalizes performing an abortion on a woman to protect her health, the [link=https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/08/24/idaho-abortion-ruling/]Washington Post[/link] reports.
The law, which was set to take effect on Thursday, bans abortions except in cases involving rape, incest or when a womans life is in danger and does not contain an exception for when a pregnant persons health is at risk. It would allow authorities to arrest a health-care professional involved in performing an abortion, putting the onus on that person to prove in court that the abortion met the criteria for one of the exceptions.
-
-
[b]Texans Who Perform Abortions Now Face Life in Prison[/b][/h1]
Performing an abortion is now a felony punishable by up to life in prison in Texas after the states trigger law, which has only narrow exceptions to save the life of a pregnant patient, went into effect Thursday, the [link=https://www.texastribune.org/2022/08/25/texas-trigger-law-abortion/]Texas Tribune[/link] reports.-
Buyers remorse? One can hope that they realize the harm theyve done & are doing in the name of fundamentalist religious dogma.
[link=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/08/25/republicans-abortion-politics/]https://www.washingtonpos…ans-abortion-politics/[/link]
The signs are disparate, inconclusive and perhaps not fully applicable to the 2022 midterm elections. But virtually everything since the Supreme Court overturned [i]Roe v. Wade[/i]back in June suggests Republicans have a political problem on their hands now that theyve obtained their long-sought goal of being able to severely restrict and even ban abortion.
And if you look closely, youll see signs of potential buyers remorse creeping in.
To the extent Republicans rethink their extremely restrictive posture on abortion in the days ahead, a South Carolina state legislator might have provided a crystallizing moment last week.
At a hearing, state Rep. Neal Collins (R) [link=https://www.thedailybeast.com/neal-collins-south-carolina-pol-emotional-after-teen-almost-loses-uterus-due-to-abortion-law-he-voted-for]recounted the arduous journey faced by a 19-year-old[/link] thanks to an abortion ban he himself supported. Collins said the womans fetus was not viable, but that attorneys told her doctor they couldnt extract it because it still had a heartbeat the standard set in the bill supported by Collins that had gone into effect just the week before.
The conservative Wall Street Journals editorial board summarized it in a piece after the New York special election, titled [link=https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/the-gops-abortion-problem-congress-midterms-marc-molinaro-new-york-democrats-nancy-pelosi-11661371246]The GOPs Abortion Problem[/link].
Republicans are on the backfoot because theyre talking about abortion as if [i]Roe[/i] were still the law, when it was easy to favor a total ban because it didnt matter, it wrote. Now the policy stakes are real, and Republicans will have to make clear what specific abortion limits they favor and why.
-
-
So much has been written since the SCOTUS decision. It is worth repeating. Fw nailed it the first day: dog caught car
-
[link=https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/1567571648454316041?s=20&t=btFtjp9m8IBFVdJ9QDF91g]AP
[/link]
[h1]Judge Strikes Down Michigan Anti-Abortion Law[/h1]
[img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FcEkwCLXwAcN9bz?format=jpg&name=medium[/img]i think the MI Supreme Court review of the potential ballot measure to enshrine abortion rights proceeds on a separate track
DETROIT (AP) — Judge strikes down Michigan's 1931 anti-abortion law, months after suspending it.
— Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) September 7, 2022
-
[link=https://www.npr.org/2022/09/08/1121858922/michigan-supreme-court-abortion-amendment-voters-ballot]https://www.npr.org/2022/…mendment-voters-ballot[/link]
Michigan Supreme Court rules abortion amendment should go to voters this November
Chief Justice Bridget Mary McCormack called the effort by board members to keep the abortion rights question off the ballot “a game of gotcha gone very bad.”
“What a sad marker of the times.”
-
Lindsey Graham expected to introduce a national abortion ban tomorrow. Reportedly , this will be a 15-week ban.
its being cast as a late term abortions bill
-
-
-
[b]Lindsey Grahams Abortion Ban Stuns Senate GOP[/b][/h1]
[link=https://www.politico.com/news/2022/09/13/grahams-abortion-ban-senate-gop-00056423]Politico[/link]: The South Carolina senator chose a uniquely tense moment to unveil his partys first bill limiting abortion access since this summers watershed reversal of Roe v. Wade. It was designed as a nod to anti-abortion activists who have never felt more emboldened. Yet Grahams bill also attempted to skate past a Republican Party thats divided over whether Congress should even be legislating on abortion after the Supreme Court struck down a nationwide right to terminate pregnancies.
And some fellow Republicans said they were highly perplexed at Grahams decision to inject a new abortion ban more conservative than his previous proposals into the nations political bloodstream at a precarious moment for the party.
Said Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX): That wasnt a conference decision. It was an individual senators decision.-
The great republican seppuku.
-
If we take back the House and the Senate, I can assure you well have a vote on our bill. If the Democrats are in charge, I dont know if well ever have a vote on our bill. -Graham on his federal abortion ban, live on tv during his presser,in a clip Dems would be happy to run as campaign ads
-
I wonder what the constitutional constitutionalist justification would be for a federal abortion law. The supreme court said: ‘there is nothing in the constitution about this so it’s a state issue’.
Commerce clause ? Is it a taxation issue ?
-
Oh cmon I know you are boards legal scholar but you are purposefully taking what the court said out of context to fit your agenda
Brief education
Grade school civics
LegislativeMakes laws (Congress, comprised of the House of Representatives and Senate)
ExecutiveCarries out laws (president, vice president, Cabinet, most federal agencies)
JudicialEvaluates laws (Supreme Court and other courts)
Legislators have every right to make a law
If the Supreme Court decides it unconstitutional then there is an issue
-
Dupe
-
Quote from Chirorad84
Oh cmon I know you are boards legal scholar but you are purposefully taking what the court said out of context to fit your agenda
Brief education
Grade school civics
LegislativeMakes laws (Congress, comprised of the House of Representatives and Senate)
ExecutiveCarries out laws (president, vice president, Cabinet, most federal agencies)
JudicialEvaluates laws (Supreme Court and other courts)
Legislators have every right to make a law
If the Supreme Court decides it unconstitutional then there is an issue
Yeah. If there is no constitutional grounds for a new federal law, it will get tossed by the first federal district court judge who gets his eyes on it. If there is a wider constitutional question it would work it’s way up through the circuits until the supreme court may or may not take it.
So again, what would be the constitutional basis for a federal law to either ban or allow abortion ?
-
-
-
-
Quote from fw
The great republican seppuku.
Heard a GOP strategist pulling his hair out (through the radio) that on a day when the GOP should have been able to hammer Biden on hot inflation numbers instead what they got was Lindsey Graham doing a high profile launch of an abortion and highlighting the Republican schism on the issue.
-
-
-
[h1][b]Lindsey Graham Scores an Own Goal on Abortion[/b][/h1]
[link=https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2022/09/14/did-lindsey-graham-just-score-an-own-goal-on-abortion-00056587?nname=playbook&nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&nrid=0000014e-f0ed-dd93-ad7f-f8edad790000&nlid=630318]Playbook[/link]: After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June, most Republicans stuck to a simple message: The decision merely sent the issue back to the states; it was not a prelude to any national ban on abortion.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) tossed all that out the window Tuesday, dropping a bill that would implement a nationwide ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy while allowing states to pass more restrictive laws. The immediate effect was to put fellow Republicans, who had already been on their heels over Roes reversal, straight onto their butts.
Said one Democrat: Grahams stunt is a godsend and helps us remind voters Republicans want to ban abortion everywhere.
-
[link=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/04/roe-overturned-congress-abortion-law/]https://www.washingtonpos…congress-abortion-law/[/link]
[b]Can Congress resurrect Roe if its overturned? Well, it could try.[/b][/h1]
[b]
[/b]The Supreme Court might well strike that down, too.[/h2]
By framing the right to abortion as a matter of access to abortion services, the WHPA is taking a page from another major civil rights bill, the [link=https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/civil-rights-act]Civil Rights Act of 1964[/link]. When Congress sought to enforce anti-discrimination requirements in public accommodations such as hotels, public transit and restaurants, it grounded its authority to do so in the [link=https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI_S8_C3_1_2/]Commerce Clause[/link]. This clause gives Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states and with the Indian tribes.
…
When the Civil Rights Act of 1964 came before the Supreme Court, even the liberal justices noted the awkwardness of arguing over whether hamburger meat crossing state lines meant a restaurant such as [link=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/379/294/]Ollies BBQ in Alabama[/link] had to allow Black patrons to sit at the counter, or whether [link=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/231/393/1444943/]an Atlanta hotel[/link] near an interstate highway had to allow Black guests because its travelers moved between states. Still, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the Civil Rights Act, giving the green light to Congress to use its commerce power to enforce civil rights.
This time around, Congress would again define access to abortion as a case of interstate commerce. People travel across state lines to procure abortion services; medical equipment that provide abortions all moves in interstate commerce; and licensing, training and education for abortion providers all involve interstate travel and commerce. Proponents hope that by codifying [i]Roe[/i] in this way, a new federal law guaranteeing the right to abortion would survive the Supreme Courts inevitable review.
…
After upholding nearly every law Congress passed under the Commerce Clause from 1937 onward, the increasingly conservative Supreme Court started to set limits on the commerce power in the mid-1990s. For example, in [link=https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-1260.ZO.html][i]U.S. v. Lopez[/i][/link] (1995), a five-justice conservative majority ruled that the Gun Free School Zones Act exceeded Congresss power under the Commerce Clause. Just a few years later, in [link=https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-5.ZS.html][i]U.S. v. Morrison[/i][/link][i] [/i](2000), the Supreme Court struck down parts of the Violence Against Women Act, despite significant findings that gender-motivated violence had an impact on interstate commerce.
With these negative Commerce Clause decisions and an even more conservative Supreme Court supermajority installed for the foreseeable future, it is likely that the same five justices who … overruled [i]Roe v. Wade[/i] would find reason to strike down the Womens Health Protection Act as exceeding Congresss power.-
What’s the point and meaning of “due process” in this Court? Apparently meaningless.
Amazing to argue that discrimination is a states right, that there is no right against discrimination, that states can set up legal classes of people with different decreasing levels of rights. Conservatives opposed Johnsons Civil Rights & Voting Rights bills on the identical argument of government overreach telling states that segregation & discrimination was not allowed.
The Constitution says nothing specific about freedom from discrimination, after all, some of it was specifically written to protect slavery, therefore the Federal government can do nothing about it.
Beyond sad.
Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn’t. Nobody ever thought that that’s what it meant. Nobody ever voted for that. If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, hey we have things called legislatures, and they enact things called laws.
– Justice Antonin Scalia
[blockquote] When the rights of even one human being are held in contempt the rights of all are in danger . . . Our Government is founded on the equality of human rightson the idea, the sacred truth that all are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Our country is an asylum for the oppressed of all nationsof all races.
[/blockquote] Attorney Robert G. Ingersoll, Should the Chinese Be Excluded? North American Review(1893) -
Some ideas are kept alive as zombie ideas, even after all this time. The Constitution does not guarantee freedom. To believe that is belief in government overreach.
The corollary was that conservatism opposed the civil rights agenda when it called for or depended on Big Government. We frown on any effort of the Negroes to attain social equality by bending the instrument of the state to their purposes, Buckley wrote in 1960.
[blockquote]But we applaud the efforts to define their rights by the lawful and non-violent use of social and economic sanctions which they choose freely to exert, and to which those against whom they are exerted are free to respond, or not, depending on what is in balance. That way is legitimate, organic progress.
[/blockquote] This opposition to Big Government engendered conservative opposition to every milestone achievement of the civil rights movement. [i]National Review[/i] denounced [i]Brown v. Board of Education[/i] (1954), calling it an act of judicial usurpation, one that ran patently counter to the intent of the Constitution and was shoddy and illegal in analysis, and invalid as sociology. It opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act and 1965 Voting Rights Act on similar grounds. A Buckley column dismissed the former as
[blockquote]a federal law, artificially deduced from the Commerce Clause of the Constitution or from the 14th Amendment, whose marginal effect will be to instruct small merchants in the Deep South on how they may conduct their business.
[/blockquote] Senator Barry Goldwater used similar reasoning to justify voting against the bill on the eve of his general election contest with Lyndon Johnson. Saying he could find no constitutional basis for the exercise of Federal regulatory authority over private employment or public accommodations, Goldwater called the law a grave threat to a constitutional republic in which fifty sovereign states have reserved to themselves and to the people those powers not specifically granted to the central or Federal government. Goldwater arrived at this conclusion, according to Rick Perlsteins book on the 1964 campaign, [i]Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus [/i](2001), after receiving advice from two young legal advisors, William Rehnquist and Robert Bork.
-
-
[h1][b]Pence gives Graham an assist, Doubles-Down on National Abortion Ban[/b][/h1]
Former Vice President Mike Pence called for a national abortion ban in [link=https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/09/14/mike_pence_abortion_bans_more_important_than_short-term_politics_148191.html]an interview with RealClearPolitics[/link], saying that[b] banning abortion is profoundly more important than any short-term politics.[/b]
[b]
[/b]
Said Pence: I welcome any and all efforts to advance the cause of life in state capitals or in the nations capital. And I have every confidence that the next Republican president, whoever that may be, will stand for the right to life. It is imperative that Republicans and conservatives resolve, here and now, that we will not shrink from the fight.
-
Amendment XXVIII for “embryos are persons” rights & women are vessels..
-
-
[h1][b]Marco Rubio Backs National Abortion Ban[/b][/h1]
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) is co-sponsoring a bill that would ban abortions nationwide after 15 weeks, throwing support behind a measure that both aligns with his longstanding desire to restrict access to abortion and risks complicating his reelection bid less than two months before Election Day, the [link=https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article265773446.html#storylink=cpy]Miami Herald[/link] reports.
The legislation, if passed, would likely have little effect on Florida, which already bans abortions after 15 weeks.
-
Why did Lindsey go on TV and say something we want to Ann abortion like the rest of the civilized world and not be like Iran. What other western countries have total style abortion ban.
-
-
[link=https://www.npr.org/2022/09/14/1123054970/ohio-abortion-ban-law-blocked-judge]Judge temporarily blocks an Ohio law banning most abortions
[/link]
The decision means abortions through 20 weeks’ gestation can continue for now, in keeping with state law in place before the ban.
Hamilton County Judge Christian Jenkins’ decision to grant a 14-day restraining order against the law came as part of a lawsuit brought by the ACLU of Ohio on behalf of abortion providers in the state. The clinics argue the law violates protections in the state Constitution guaranteeing individual liberty and equal protection. The suit also says the law is unconstitutionally vague.
The law was signed by Republican Gov. Mike DeWine [link=https://www.npr.org/2019/04/11/712455980/a-bill-banning-most-abortions-becomes-law-in-ohio]in April 2019[/link], and prohibits most abortions after the first detectable “fetal heartbeat.” Cardiac activity can be detected as early as six weeks into pregnancy, before many people know they’re pregnant. The law had been blocked through a legal challenge, then went into effect after the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision was overturned.[/QUOTE]
-
[b]Why J.D. Vance Backs a Federal Ban on Abortion[/b][/h1]
When asked about a possible federal ban on abortions last summer, Ohio U.S. Senate candidate J.D. Vance (R) suggested George Soros might charter planes to send women to California for abortions, the [link=https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/2022/09/15/ohio-senate-race-tim-ryan-blasts-lindsey-graham-abortion-ban/69496242007/]Columbus Dispatch[/link] reports.
Said Vance: Lets say Roe v. Wade is overruled. Ohio bans abortion in 2022 lets say 2024. Then every day, George Soros sends a 747 to Columbus to load up disproportionately Black women to get them to go have abortions in California. Of course, the left will celebrate this as a victory for diversity If that happens, do you need some federal response to prevent it from happening because its really creepy? Im pretty sympathetic to that, actually.-
Did he really say that?
-
Yes he did! Theres a word for that guy & it refers to a used condom.
-
Newsom trolling red states.
Go Gavin!
[link=https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/come-to-california-newsom-sponsored-abortion-rights-billboards-go-up-in-7-states/]https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/come-to-california-newsom-sponsored-abortion-rights-billboards-go-up-in-7-states/[/link]-
History repeats with racist stunts.
[link=https://www.thedailybeast.com/this-isnt-the-first-time-white-racists-have-sent-migrants-north-on-buses-though-using-planes-is-new]https://www.thedailybeast.com/this-isnt-the-first-time-white-racists-have-sent-migrants-north-on-buses-though-using-planes-is-new[/link] -
[link=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/17/republicans-abortion-ballot-measures/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=wp_politics]Aaron Blake[/link]:
[b]Yall are scared: The huge, looming fight over abortion referendums[/b]
As their party confronts the vexing political fallout of the Supreme Court striking down Roe v. Wade, some Republicans especially those in tough 2022 races are taking things a step further in trying to rid themselves of the issue: Embracing the idea that voters themselves should decide it.
The party as a whole, of course, probably wont like what those voters decide, as Kansas recently showed. And we should hardly expect this approach to catch on very widely. Indeed, getting such measures on the ballot looks to be one of the next big battlegrounds in the fight over abortion, with Republicans as a whole preparing to fight against it.
But to a few candidates, direct democracy is apparently an attractive off-ramp.
-
-
-
-
-
Interesting that suddenly democracy is the path of least resistance for these Republicans whove insisted we are not a democracy, we are a republic, as if.
Easy to ignore 250 years of American history if you are ignorant, dealing with fellow ignoramuses.
