Draft Alito opinion leaked overturning Roe

One more reason why this is such a bad policy decision:
Roe Will Fall. But the Supreme Court’s Legitimacy Is Already Lost.
f this draft opinion becomes precedent of the Court, the results will be catastrophic for women, particularly for women in the states that will immediately make abortion unlawful, and in those places, particularly for young women, poor women, and black and brown women who will not have the time, resources, or ability to travel out of state. The Court’s staggering lack of regard for its own legitimacy is exceeded only by its vicious disregard for the real consequences for real pregnant people who are 14 times more likely to die in childbirth than from terminating a pregnancy. The Mississippi law—the law that this opinion is upholding—has no exception for rape or incest. We will immediately see a raft of bans that give rights to fathers, including sexual assailants, and punish with ever more cruelty and violence women who miscarry or do harm to their fetuses. The days of pretending that women’s health and safety were of paramount concern are over.

 

Im a libertarian so I think it should be a right, but it’s simply not. There are countless examples of it not being the case

Drug laws? The draft? Vaccine mandates? I can go on

All should be slam dunks for bodily autonomy. Yet many on the left do not think so, so clearly the argument is not for bodily autonomy

Abortion at least has the question of viability

 

The gov can imprison you for doing drugs or dodging the draft.

 

We're in agreement on drug laws. There is no vaccine mandate that results in your imprisonment if you don't get a vaccine.

 

You are overplaying the imprisonment card. Are you saying you’d be ok if the government just imposed a huge fine of you got an abortion (or performed an abortion)?

 

The draft is a separate issue. And they can justify drug laws even if there is a right. Rights aren't unlimited. Although, I don't think the government should be criminalizing people's choices, as long as they aren't harming other persons.

 

No. For the same reason that the government can't impose a huge fine if you refuse the vaccine.

 

It’s going to be quite a mess.

Many of the civilized countries that went down this path, reversed course, when they found it didn’t actually reduce overall abortions and even caused innocent mothers to die when they were denied medical abortions to save their own life (such as in Ireland). After one famous outrage case over a woman who died after a miscarriage (an abortion would have saved her life), Ireland went from having a constitutional ban on abortion, to 67% voting to effectively repeal that ban. But of course that was the people voting directly on the issue, in this country it isn’t that simple, this reversal of precedent goes against what a similar % of people already think and apparantly the extremist nutters on the court don’t care.

 

They can just go after a business. So you’d be ok if they can just fine the abortion provider?

The government (federal and state) was absolutely putting in place vaccine mandates. It’s absolute revisionist history to say otherwise.

 

Time to sandblast " equal justice under law" off their bldg. No longer applies.

 

Not unless they have a compelling interest and a narrowly tailored law.

 

But vaccine mandates are ok? People aren’t going to magically forget the mandates

 

The answer remains the same.

 

I really don’t understand this argument.
You can walk around your house naked all day if you want, but if you try and walk into a restaurant or your job that way you’re getting arrested or fired. Some things have different rules for you in public and private. Vaccines were no different. You had the right not to get one, that was never abridged. There weren’t any vaccine olive coming to your house forcing something in your arm or hauling you off. But you didn’t have the right to infect anyone else. It’s a basic libertarian principle, you have every right imaginable until it infringes on someone else. And not talking the vaccine increased your risk of getting the virus and therefore infecting someone else. And that’s before getting into the societal discussion of whether you have the right to contribute to overloading hospitals and putting surgeries and treatments for others at risk because you don’t want to get it.
And more than that, other vaccines have been mandatory for decades for all sorts of things. Almost no one ever complained about it. I had to provide proof of vaccination to my elementary and high schools, and UF. Again, so did you and everyone else here presumably, and I don’t remember it ever being a topic here by anyone before the pandemic.
If you want the best example to your argument, it’s motorcycle helmets. Or assisted suicide.

 

The decision touches on some interesting legal concepts that are going to get lost in the outrage. To me the real problem is the disingenuousness of the opinion. Based on this analysis, any right that isn't in the constitution explicitly is on the chopping block - Like that right of privacy we all think we have that isn't in the constitution

 

His type of crazed logic is why slavery persisted 100 years after the so-called bill of rights, arguably some of the later rights-granting amendments should have already been covered in the base constitution and bill of rights, but more specificity was needed because of the failure of Supreme Courts prior.

 

Progressives not voting for Hillary, and RBG sealed its fate..

The fallout and backlash will be enormous.

Exclusive: Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

The Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wadedecision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO.

The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” he writes in the document, labeled as the “Opinion of the Court.” “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

Deliberations on controversial cases have in the past been fluid. Justices can and sometimes do change their votes as draft opinions circulate and major decisions can be subject to multiple drafts and vote-trading, sometimes until just days before a decision is unveiled. The court’s holding will not be final until it is published, likely in the next two months.

 

Somehow this will be the most overlooked part of the article but go ahead and let the pearl clutching and emotional fear mongering commence.

 

Didn’t see the other thread, y’all can merge this..

 

Interesting trend.

The decline since 1997 for under some circs was largely picked up by legal under any circs. That's still 8 of every 10 adults who think abortion should be legal in some capacity and only 3 points less than 1997.