On abortion

[Bo Diddley]

Utah AG announces he will not prosecute utah’s new anti-abortion law. Says it is likely unconstitutional so it is a waste of time.

These dualing abortion laws (full-term OK in liberal states, severely restriction in conservative states) are dumb. I am a broken record, but politics are broken right now. God help us.

Amen.

I'd like to believe it's a vocal minority, but more and more people I know seem to be too far out on the poles.

[Northwestcoug]

Utah AG announces he will not prosecute utah’s new anti-abortion law. Says it is likely unconstitutional so it is a waste of time.

These dualing abortion laws (full-term OK in liberal states, severely restriction in conservative states) are dumb. I am a broken record, but politics are broken right now. God help us.

I am at a loss to explain those states' long-term strategies. They are obviously crafting laws for a potential SC hearing, but there is no way even a conservative majority is going strike down Roe in favor of a 6-8 week ban or no rape/incest exceptions. At least I don't think so.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Utah AG announces he will not prosecute utah’s new anti-abortion law. Says it is likely unconstitutional so it is a waste of time.

These dualing abortion laws (full-term OK in liberal states, severely restriction in conservative states) are dumb. I am a broken record, but politics are broken right now. God help us.

[Moliere]

Good point. Republicans in Alabama don't give a shit about women's mental health, well being, or bodily autonomy.

It's an insane law, but one that has good support in Alabama. THankfully I belong to a church that has a more liberal view on abortion. Not allowing an abortion in the case of rape is just crazy.

[Uncle Ted]

Embedded Tweet

[MartyFunkhouser]

I’m more concerned about their mental health and well being.

Good point. Republicans in Alabama don't give a shit about women's mental health, well being, or bodily autonomy.

[Moliere]

This. He is a piece of human garbage and he should just be ignored.

Two things need to happen with this bold move from Alabama. Ginsburg needs to survive until 2020 and Trump needs to be out of office.

I realize that many on here are not abortion supporters, but this law goes way too far and is heartless. To force someone who is raped (especially a child) to carry a child to term is just wrong on so many levels. It is proof positive that the republicans in Alabama don't give a shit about the bodily autonomy of women.

I’m more concerned about their mental health and well being.

[Northwestcoug]

What a moron. I'm sure in his head he thought this was a hot take. And so did 750 other people...

[MartyFunkhouser]

Its best to just ignore Matt Walsh...seriously

This. He is a piece of human garbage and he should just be ignored.

Two things need to happen with this bold move from Alabama. Ginsburg needs to survive until 2020 and Trump needs to be out of office.

I realize that many on here are not abortion supporters, but this law goes way too far and is heartless. To force someone who is raped (especially a child) to carry a child to term is just wrong on so many levels. It is proof positive that the republicans in Alabama don't give a shit about the bodily autonomy of women.

[Flystripper]

Interesting take on the Alabama abortion law...

Embedded Tweet

Its best to just ignore Matt Walsh...seriously

[Moliere]

Interesting take on the Alabama abortion law...

Embedded Tweet

[smokymountainrain]

I approve of the roundhouse kick as a solution to most of life's problems.

[BigPiney]

I approve of the roundhouse kick as a solution to most of life's problems.

[LiveCoug]

This seems like a perfectly rational response to someone who disagrees with your stance on abortion

Embedded Tweet

[Topper]

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 agree that this is how the Supreme Court would act if it is going to "overturn" the precedent. I am doubtful that it will be overturned, given that 24% of the electorate wants an absolute right, and another 57% wants a right that is only slightly limited, the Supreme Court is not about changing simply to accommodate the 16% who want an outright complete ban. I just don't see it. And with Casey around, there is no need to deal with the tortured logic of R. v. W.