On abortion

[Pelado]

I think Politico is pretty reliable, but this is hard to believe. Per that website, a draft opinion written by Alito and joined in by at least four others will be released within the next couple of months overturning Roe v. Wade. If true, this would be a very disturbing and unprecedented leak, would have a profound effect on the mid-terms, and might revive the stupid idea of court-packing. Anyone seen confirmation of this story?

That story looks legit. If not, someone went through a lot of work to forge that draft.

[All-American]

I think Politico is pretty reliable, but this is hard to believe. Per that website, a draft opinion written by Alito and joined in by at least four others will be released within the next couple of months overturning Roe v. Wade. If true, this would be a very disturbing and unprecedented leak, would have a profound effect on the mid-terms, and might revive the stupid idea of court-packing. Anyone seen confirmation of this story?

Twelve-plus hours later, there appears to be little suggestion that the draft is not authentic.

Say whatever you want about the opinion. The leak is deeply disturbing.

[BigFatMeanie]

That is very disturbing that there would be that type of leak. It is also very disturbing that the court would overturn Roe v. Wade.

Disturbing from a "moral" perspective (i.e. it disturbs your sense of morals about women's rights) or disturbing from a legal perspective (i.e. you think Roe v. Wade was a legally sound decision), or both?

Personally, I'm not disturbed from either a moral or legal perspective, but I recognize that others have differing opinions on both perspectives.

I agree with PAC that it will revive the stupid idea of court packing, and that thought disturbs me.

[Applejack]

Twelve-plus hours later, there appears to be little suggestion that the draft is not authentic.

Say whatever you want about the opinion. The leak is deeply disturbing.

Thank you. The opinion is weak: because drawing a line would be arbitrary we can't draw a line? Isn't that what most every law does? Speed limits, ounces of toothpaste that you can take on an airplane, etc. And courts do this all the time as well: You can hold a suspect without charging him for 48 hours, but not 49, etc.

Weird opinion. But I guess the 50-year plot to ruin America through easy access abortion has been thwarted.

[Applejack]

Disturbing from a "moral" perspective (i.e. it disturbs your sense of morals about women's rights) or disturbing from a legal perspective (i.e. you think Roe v. Wade was a legally sound decision), or both?

Personally, I'm not disturbed from either a moral or legal perspective, but I recognize that others have differing opinions on both perspectives.

I agree with PAC that it will revive the stupid idea of court packing, and that thought disturbs me.

Haha. Court-packing. The new boogey man. "The scary thing about electing Biden will be he will try to pack the court;" "The scary thing about making abortion illegal in large swaths of the country is that democrats will pack the court"; "the scary thing about an insurrection against our own government is that democrats will try to pack the court."

[YOhio]

As someone who is relatively ambivalent on the subject, I'm so annoyed that abortion will play an even bigger role in our politics for the foreseeable future. And it's not like the extremes on either side will ever be placated.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Disturbing from a "moral" perspective (i.e. it disturbs your sense of morals about women's rights) or disturbing from a legal perspective (i.e. you think Roe v. Wade was a legally sound decision), or both?

.....

Disturbing because the opinion wasn't final. It's typical for a justice to circulate an opinion for further discussion and, occasionally, substantial revision, even occasional vote-changing, all of which must occur in camera to reduce outside influence, among other things. As others have noted, if the source is determined, that person's legal career is over or at least substantially diminished.

[YOhio]

Disturbing because the opinion wasn't final. It's typical for a justice to circulate an opinion for further discussion and, occasionally, substantial revision, even occasional vote-changing, all of which must occur in camera to reduce outside influence, among other things. As others have noted, if the source is determined, that person's legal career is over or at least substantially diminished.

While at the same time that person's political/media career is looking bright.

[Art Vandelay]

As someone who is relatively ambivalent on the subject, I'm so annoyed that abortion will play an even bigger role in our politics for the foreseeable future. And it's not like the extremes on either side will ever be placated.

Just was texting back and forth with a friend (obviously it's not YO) about this. Was saying: If you thought Trump, BLM or COVID brought out the extremists, wait until abortion become topic 1-25 again. The rhetoric and potential for violence will be a 100% worse, IMO

[Bo Diddley]

Disturbing because the opinion wasn't final. It's typical for a justice to circulate an opinion for further discussion and, occasionally, substantial revision, even occasional vote-changing, all of which must occur in camera to reduce outside influence, among other things. As others have noted, if the source is determined, that person's legal career is over or at least substantially diminished.

Agreed. There's a process that is now muddied. Deliberations occur behind closed doors for a reason.

[Bo Diddley]

Just was texting back and forth with a friend (obviously it's not YO) about this. Was saying: If you thought Trump, BLM or COVID brought out the extremists, wait until abortion become topic 1-25 again. The rhetoric and potential for violence will be a 100% worse, IMO

What do you have against YO?

[Northwestcoug]

The 'leave Roe v. Wade alone' contingent seems like a majority opinion. Are they fired up enough to vote in 60 pro-choice senators? Probably not. I mean they should, but it just seems like voter apathy has gotten worse.

[Art Vandelay]

Disturbing because the opinion wasn't final. It's typical for a justice to circulate an opinion for further discussion and, occasionally, substantial revision, even occasional vote-changing, all of which must occur in camera to reduce outside influence, among other things. As others have noted, if the source is determined, that person's legal career is over or at least substantially diminished.

Based upon my advanced knowledge of SCOTUS (I read The Brethren, The Nine, and The American Supreme Court) I would assume it was a liberal leaning clerk. After reading those books, I was surprised how much of the legal legwork the clerks do.

[Art Vandelay]

What do you have against YO?

Since moving to Utah he's not nearly as funny or acerbic as he use to be. He is obviously making his play to move up of the key-holder ladder of his ward/stake.

[Clark Addison]

As someone who is relatively ambivalent on the subject, I'm so annoyed that abortion will play an even bigger role in our politics for the foreseeable future. And it's not like the extremes on either side will ever be placated.

A thousand times this. I don't know when I will be able to get back on Twitter.