good point but it is 98 pages so I have to pace myself to read it haha... give me a few days
.
So let's see who at the Court refuses to take a polygraph exam
- Thread starter TreeFrogTrader
- Start date
good point but it is 98 pages so I have to pace myself to read it haha... give me a few days
.To be fair as I am digging into the decision this Court specifically separates marriage, schools and similar rights as foundational in the constitution and made a distinction about those rights being untouchable versus how abortion was established in R v. W.
I think it would be hyperbole for either side to think this decision gives them the right to bump many 14th Amendment rights back to the States.
Here is the clause in question I was referring to:
None ofthe other decisions cited by Roe and Casey involved the critical moral question posed by abortion. They are therefore inapposite. They do not sup- port the right toobtain anabortion, and by the same token, our conclusion that the Constitution does notconfer such a right does not undermine them in anyway.
The "other decisions" mentioned above which I did not include for brevity were the cases on the SC as follows:
inter racial marriages, 388 U.S. 1(1967); the right to marry while in prison, Turnerv. Saftey, 482 U. S. 78 (1987); the right to obtain contracep- tives, Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), Eisen- stadt v. Baird, 405 U. S. 438 (1972), Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U. S. 678 (1977); the righttore- side with relatives, Moore v. Fast Cleveland, 431 U. S. 494 1977); the right to make decisions about the education of one's children, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U. S. 510 (1925), Meyerv. Nebraska, 262 U. S. 390 (1925); the right not to be sterilized without consent, Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U. S. 535 (1942); and the right in certain circumstances not to undergo involuntary surgery, forced administration of drugs, or other substantially simi. lar procedures, Winston v. Lee, 470 U. S. 753 (1985), Wash- ington. Harper, 494 U. S. 210 (1990), Rochin.v. California, 342 U. S. 165 (1952).
So bottom line is Court is saying we are deciding abortion is not within the 14th Amendment right protected under the constitution but this has nothing to do with other rights we DID find protected and still find protected such as marriage and medical procedures that dont involve another party that is involved.
None ofthe other decisions cited by Roe and Casey involved the critical moral question posed by abortion. They are therefore inapposite. They do not sup- port the right toobtain anabortion, and by the same token, our conclusion that the Constitution does notconfer such a right does not undermine them in anyway.
The "other decisions" mentioned above which I did not include for brevity were the cases on the SC as follows:
inter racial marriages, 388 U.S. 1(1967); the right to marry while in prison, Turnerv. Saftey, 482 U. S. 78 (1987); the right to obtain contracep- tives, Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), Eisen- stadt v. Baird, 405 U. S. 438 (1972), Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U. S. 678 (1977); the righttore- side with relatives, Moore v. Fast Cleveland, 431 U. S. 494 1977); the right to make decisions about the education of one's children, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U. S. 510 (1925), Meyerv. Nebraska, 262 U. S. 390 (1925); the right not to be sterilized without consent, Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U. S. 535 (1942); and the right in certain circumstances not to undergo involuntary surgery, forced administration of drugs, or other substantially simi. lar procedures, Winston v. Lee, 470 U. S. 753 (1985), Wash- ington. Harper, 494 U. S. 210 (1990), Rochin.v. California, 342 U. S. 165 (1952).
So bottom line is Court is saying we are deciding abortion is not within the 14th Amendment right protected under the constitution but this has nothing to do with other rights we DID find protected and still find protected such as marriage and medical procedures that dont involve another party that is involved.
Who Leaked Samuel Alito’s Draft Opinion Striking Down Roe v. Wade—and Why?
https://slate.com/news-and-politics...-abortion-opinion-leaker-identity-theory.html
https://slate.com/news-and-politics...-abortion-opinion-leaker-identity-theory.html
This is awesome.
Indian girl unhinged and on the warpath.
Take your meds, Pocahonky.
I hope Bret Kavanaugh is enjoying the show. The Karma car has come for the Klowns.
Indian girl unhinged and on the warpath.
Take your meds, Pocahonky.
I hope Bret Kavanaugh is enjoying the show. The Karma car has come for the Klowns.
I guess she thinks that abortion will just be automatically totally illegal if Roe is overturned. What an idiot.
It's all kabuki theatre.