The Supreme Court of the United States Thread

#9,126
#9,126
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#9,128
#9,128
ClearwaterVol said:
This is fine parsing. They removed a constitutional right that had belonged to women for 50 years.
Click to expand...

Even RBG admitted that Roe was not a sound reading of the constitution. There's no other western country that covers the right to abortion in their constitution or their courts. This issue is settled legislatively, including Canada. It's nuts that this has been up to our SCOTUS for 50 yrs and has made our confirmation hearings a circus as well. It was never a constitutional right.

Having said all that, this is an issue that Congress should settle through laws that apply to the entire country. I am a Goldwater conservative who gets squirmy when gov't gets too involved so I do support a right to abortions in many but not all cases. We can't have a country where a woman in Ann Arbor has a right to an abortion but a woman in Toledo, OH does not. That's also nuts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TRUEFANVol
#9,129
#9,129
Sea Ray said:
Even RBG admitted that Roe was not a sound reading of the constitution. There's no other western country that covers the right to abortion in their constitution or their courts. This issue is settled legislatively, including Canada. It's nuts that this has been up to our SCOTUS for 50 yrs and has made our confirmation hearings a circus as well. It was never a constitutional right.

Having said all that, this is an issue that Congress should settle through laws that apply to the entire country. I am a Goldwater conservative who gets squirmy when gov't gets too involved so I do support a right to abortions in many but not all cases. We can't have a country where a woman in Ann Arbor has a right to an abortion but a woman in Toledo, OH does not. That's also nuts.
Click to expand...

She still believed it to be a constitutional issue.
 
#9,131
#9,131
Sea Ray said:
Even RBG admitted that Roe was not a sound reading of the constitution. There's no other western country that covers the right to abortion in their constitution or their courts. This issue is settled legislatively, including Canada. It's nuts that this has been up to our SCOTUS for 50 yrs and has made our confirmation hearings a circus as well. It was never a constitutional right.

Having said all that, this is an issue that Congress should settle through laws that apply to the entire country. I am a Goldwater conservative who gets squirmy when gov't gets too involved so I do support a right to abortions in many but not all cases. We can't have a country where a woman in Ann Arbor has a right to an abortion but a woman in Toledo, OH does not. That's also nuts.
Click to expand...

That's absolutely nuts. What other subject do you apply the absurdity of federalism to? Guns, speed limits, alcohol, where's your line in the sand that the feds shouldn't be crossing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, Orangeslice13 and 0nelilreb
#9,133
#9,133
hog88 said:
That's absolutely nuts. What other subject do you apply the absurdity of federalism to? Guns, speed limits, alcohol, where's your line in the sand that the feds shouldn't be crossing?
Click to expand...
Guns are a right in the Constitution. Alcohol consumption and speed limits are not rights
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlipKidVol
#9,138
#9,138
ClearwaterVol said:
This is fine parsing. They removed a constitutional right that had belonged to women for 50 years.
Click to expand...
No such constitutional right ever existed and still doesn’t. SCOTUS wrote legislation from the bench that’s bad. And Congress never back filled with actual legislation which would have codified any such right OR privilege.

The ruling now is the correct ruling on how the Constitution and federal laws are written today. You’re a lawyer. If you feel strongly enough that this requires federal protections then get to work putting them in place via the proper frame work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlipKidVol, AM64, davethevol and 3 others
#9,139
#9,139
NorthDallas40 said:
No such constitutional right ever existed and still doesn’t. SCOTUS wrote legislation from the bench that’s bad. And Congress never back filled with actual legislation which would have codified any such right OR privilege.

The ruling now is the correct ruling on how the Constitution and federal laws are written today. You’re a lawyer. If you feel strongly enough that this requires federal protections then get to work putting them in place via the proper frame work.
Click to expand...
But then they would lose it as a wedge issue. Can't have that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlipKidVol, AM64 and NorthDallas40
#9,141
#9,141
hog88 said:
Why? Abortion isn't a federal issue.
Click to expand...

Abortion is a right. Depending on which side you're on, it's either a right of the mother or a right of the unborn, but it is a right and should be spelled out in federal legislation like civil rights bills
 
#9,144
#9,144
Sea Ray said:
I sure did. Rights should be a federal issue. Regulation should be a state thing
Click to expand...

What? That makes no sense what so ever. Protection of individual liberty and rights should be the number 1 priority of government at all levels but abortion isn't a covered constitutional right nor IMO a natural right. We are too big of a country with a diverse population to have 1 size fits all laws (outside of what's addressed in the constitution).
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and davethevol
#9,147
#9,147
Sea Ray said:
Abortion is a right. Depending on which side you're on, it's either a right of the mother or a right of the unborn, but it is a right and should be spelled out in federal legislation like civil rights bills
Click to expand...

Then work to amend the constitution, otherwise it falls within the purview of the state.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlipKidVol, AM64, 0nelilreb and 1 other person
#9,149
#9,149
Carl Pickens said:
From a musician that had an album called Dookie....and American Idiot

Green Day's Billie Joe Armstrong says he's renouncing his US citizenship: 'F--- America'

"F--- America, I’m f---ing renouncing my citizenship," Armstrong said. "I’m f---ing coming here." "There’s just too much f---ing stupid in the world to go back to that miserable f---ing excuse for a country," Armstrong added.
Click to expand...

Armstrong lives in California, but says he's going to move to the UK in protest of the Dobbs decision. Even after the Dobbs decision, California still has much more liberal abortion laws than the UK.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens, Rickyvol77, AM64 and 2 others
#9,150
#9,150
NorthDallas40 said:
Let’s be sure we’re using the correct terms then. Any “right” granted by any government legislative body isn’t a right it’s a privilege since they can legislatively take it back away also.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why you'd make that distinction. As we just saw, the Judicial branch can also take back a right
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top