On abortion

[Uncle Ted]

Outright overturned, as in a case arises in 2019 wherein the holding is in effect "Roe v. Wade is now dead letter"? Probably not, but who knows. You just can't understate how poor a decision was Roe-- even defenders of the right to abortion will admit that it is a pathetic piece of work. (In fact, one could argue it has already been overturned; to the extent there is a constitutional right to an abortion, it largely emanates from Planned Parenthood v. Casey, not Roe.) Roe is the classic case of a panel of judges deciding a policy issue better left to the political branches, and it would not be inconsistent with the mantra conservative jurists have been touting for the last three decades to acknowledge that the judicial grant of the right to an abortion was a legal miscarriage.

But no, public perception of the court still matters (in fact it is all the Court really has), and it doesn't serve anyone's interests to suggest the law changes when a new judge takes the bench. So the action will happen when the court grants and denies certiorari. If a case presents itself as an opportunity to cleanly overturn Roe, they'll turn it down. What they will do instead is pare it back by considering the issues on the fringe, where the right to an abortion is weighed against any number of other legitimate governmental interests, each of which they will find outweighs the right to an abortion without saying outright that the right to an abortion has no weight at all. Roe only gets overturned outright if some circuit court picks up on the cues and decides there's nothing left to Roe and creates a circuit split.

I am not a legal scholar but didn't R vs W come down to some implied right of privacy? If so, can we get the NSA/FBI/CIA to stop listening to all our phone calls?

Speaking of which, Drumpf's pick for the SCOTUS sided with the spooks for spying on us (i.e., he is no fan of online privacy). Forget abortion, you dumb liberals, this is the real reason you should vote against this pick! I hope Rand votes against him.

[Walter Sobchak]

So awesome.

And very thoughtful of you to include the Spanish subtitles so wap could understand the content. But I wonder if the jokes really translate over.

wuap too busy tilting at windmills. Just yesterday he was bitching about some stupid thing on the FB. He unfriended me over my comment. Sad!

[Northwestcoug]

Does anyone really believe R v. W will be overturned? Regardless of who replaces Kennedy, I can't see it being undone. Roberts has proven he doesn't want to make waves, and he'd surely vote to keep it. I wouldn't be surprised if if Gorsuch did the same. I can't see it ever being undone.

I agree, it's unlikely. But not impossible. Both the president and vice-president are on record saying they will work to get it overturned. And I haven't checked in years, but I know it was a platform policy in every RNC election cycle for decades.

Democrats and independents who hear this continually from the republican side, for decades, will understandably take them at their word. You can't blame them for being at least concerned that it's a possibility.

[All-American]

Does anyone really believe R v. W will be overturned? Regardless of who replaces Kennedy, I can't see it being undone. Roberts has proven he doesn't want to make waves, and he'd surely vote to keep it. I wouldn't be surprised if if Gorsuch did the same. I can't see it ever being undone.

Outright overturned, as in a case arises in 2019 wherein the holding is in effect "Roe v. Wade is now dead letter"? Probably not, but who knows. You just can't understate how poor a decision was Roe-- even defenders of the right to abortion will admit that it is a pathetic piece of work. (In fact, one could argue it has already been overturned; to the extent there is a constitutional right to an abortion, it largely emanates from Planned Parenthood v. Casey, not Roe.) Roe is the classic case of a panel of judges deciding a policy issue better left to the political branches, and it would not be inconsistent with the mantra conservative jurists have been touting for the last three decades to acknowledge that the judicial grant of the right to an abortion was a legal miscarriage.

But no, public perception of the court still matters (in fact it is all the Court really has), and it doesn't serve anyone's interests to suggest the law changes when a new judge takes the bench. So the action will happen when the court grants and denies certiorari. If a case presents itself as an opportunity to cleanly overturn Roe, they'll turn it down. What they will do instead is pare it back by considering the issues on the fringe, where the right to an abortion is weighed against any number of other legitimate governmental interests, each of which they will find outweighs the right to an abortion without saying outright that the right to an abortion has no weight at all. Roe only gets overturned outright if some circuit court picks up on the cues and decides there's nothing left to Roe and creates a circuit split.

[Moliere]

Does anyone really believe R v. W will be overturned? Regardless of who replaces Kennedy, I can't see it being undone. Roberts has proven he doesn't want to make waves, and he'd surely vote to keep it. I wouldn't be surprised if if Gorsuch did the same. I can't see it ever being undone.

Nope, r v w won’t be overturned and contraception won’t be banned. It’s all leftist fear mongering.

Apparently Kavanaugh is less conservative than Gorsuch, according to some nytimes scoring mechanism. Kind f funny given the hissy fit some leftists are throwing.

[cowboy]

Does anyone really believe R v. W will be overturned? Regardless of who replaces Kennedy, I can't see it being undone. Roberts has proven he doesn't want to make waves, and he'd surely vote to keep it. I wouldn't be surprised if if Gorsuch did the same. I can't see it ever being undone.

[myboynoah]

Best take on abortion, IMHO.

So awesome.

And very thoughtful of you to include the Spanish subtitles so wap could understand the content. But I wonder if the jokes really translate over.

[myboynoah]

Please tell me you also support cheap and easy access to birth control. If you don't, it is nothing more than moralizing without actually addressing the core issue.

Yes, I fully support something that already exists.

Let's not sugar coat what happens when a fetus is aborted. And please, no more emotional pleas for men to tell their wonderful abortion stories. It's not wonderful, and men don't have a choice in the matter, so why celebrate that?

[Walter Sobchak]

Best take on abortion, IMHO.

[old_gregg]

Man, I hate the pro-life/pro-choice labeling that's used with this issue. I'm both, btw.

leftist scum!

[MartyFunkhouser]

Man, I hate the pro-life/pro-choice labeling that's used with this issue. I'm both, btw.

I'm right there with you. I hate that labeling. I also hated the support traditional marriage/support marriage equality labels.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Man, I hate the pro-life/pro-choice labeling that's used with this issue. I'm both, btw.

[MartyFunkhouser]

There are some pro-life democrats, but the party is certainly becoming more dogmatic on this issue: DNC chair Tom Perez said all Democratic candidates must support a woman’s right to choose.

It seems like you aren't allowing for a range of opinions among those that support abortion. For example, I support abortion but want policies in place to minimize the number of abortions that occur because of an unwanted pregnancy.

[Crockett]

darn that monolithic left. too bad only trump voters are capable of nuance.

There are some pro-life democrats, but the party is certainly becoming more hostile to them and more dogmatic on this issue: DNC chair Tom Perez said all Democratic candidates must support a woman’s right to choose.

[MartyFunkhouser]

This is pretty sick shit.

Men should worry about the future of Roe v. Wade, too



What the hell?!?!?

Aside from losing a spouse, she boils this down to economics and convenience. I have no doubt that the vast majority of abortions happen due to economic and convenience. "Thank goodness she killed that baby so that you could finish graduate school unburdened by parental responsibilities." Yes, let's rejoice and tell that powerful story.

And why should men get all ecstatic about a decision over which they have no control? Not saying they should. Just saying you might as well rejoice that you didn't get hit by a meteor this morning.

Bunch of sick assholes.

This is pretty simple. If you don't want a baby, don't dip your stick without protection. Or get fixed.

Please tell me you also support cheap and easy access to birth control. If you don't, it is nothing more than moralizing without actually addressing the core issue.

If you want less abortions, follow Colorado's route and offer free IUDs.