Roe v. Wade Overturned
 

This one probably will have been beaten to death by the end of the day, but I want to take a different tack: Do you think this decision could possibly have a positive effect in the midterms for the Democrats by stirring up the base and getting out the vote?

NB: The conspiracy theorist in me also wonders if the timing of the release of the decision was strategy by the conservative majority to knock the 01-06 hearings out of the news cycle. I had heard it wasn't due out until July.

I feel with all of what has been occurring lately over the recent years. This decision is just another one of many reasons to never vote republican ever again. Will this happen to be the straw?

November is a long way off still. The economy may be the number one issue driving this time.

Alito's Abortion Ruling Overturning Roe Is an Insult to the 9th Amendment
The Constitution protects many more rights than it mentions, as James Madison explained.

https://reason.com/2022/06/24/alitos...9th-amendment/

While the libertarians are wrong about many things, they get this one right.

Clearly opinions vary. :D

BTW, this is another delivered Trump promise.

And the real win here is that the decision is left to the individual states. And if someone lives in a state that has laws that go completely against their values, they can always leave and go to another one. It's why I left Seattle and moved to Kentucky. My vote never counted in Seattle, and now it still nevr counts, but for the opposite reason. I live around like minded people. It makes life happier and much less stressful. And the 9th is really about constraining the FEDERAL government from taking away rights, which is exactly what this decision honored. It didn't make abortion legal or illegal. It put it in the hands of the states, where it belongs.

Now that the Reich-Wing conservatives have established a foothold in the SC they're not going to stop with Roe v. Wade. Even if the GOP takeover is stopped they'll push every decision they don't like up to the SC for the final say.

Actually, not. Right at the top of your linked article:

The Constitution protects many more rights than it mentions, as James Madison explained.

So, what flows thereafter in the article is premised on the author's assumption that the original intent of the language in the Bill or Rights, and by extension the exhaustive list of "inalienable rights" includes some concept of "reproductive freedom" as defined by the Pro-Choice advocates. This is not only flawed logic, it leans a bit into demagogic territory, with some sophistry thrown in for good measure.

John Locke's description of inalienable rights could actually be interpreted as pro-life:

“The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions… (and) when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of life, liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.”

A reflection of that list of rights was authored by US State Department in 1948 when it helped create the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. No mention of abortion or "reproductive rights" in there either.

No, Roe allowed the US gov't, shrouded in a cloud or Supreme Court-provided armor, to use its disproportionality heavy finger to tip the scales away from the states and legislatures. Ruth Bader-Ginsberg observed this.

“My criticism of Roe is that it seemed to have stopped the momentum on the side of change,” Ginsburg said. She would’ve preferred that abortion rights be secured more gradually, in a process that included state legislatures and the courts, she added. Ginsburg also was troubled that the focus on Roe was on a right to privacy, rather than women’s rights.

She was correct on this. Abortion was a legal medical procedure for physicians to provide in many states before Roe. Those states legalized the practice via their state legislatures with "the consent of the governed" who elected them. Overturning Roe will move the decision-making on this closer to the voters, which is a good thing in my opinion.

whell
Except that there will be politicians in the way.

Very well said. I have to admit that I was thinking that if I were to interpret the 9th the way leftists now want to interpret it, I could say, "I want to have sex with my sister, and the 9th says the federal government can not take that right away just because it's not already enumerated. But it goes deeper. The ninth is really a pseudo "states rights" amendment. The federal government may not be able to make it illegal, but my state can.

This gets a bit into what I started saying a few years ago: The US is like the EU in a lot of ways, except it has a military force. That is, just as the EU is really a bunch of mostly sovereign nations that belong to the single federation, the same is true for the 50 member nations of the US. And the Supreme court just "officially" gave them all a little more sovereignty.

Thomas already said they are not done and mentioned same sex marriage and contraception.

I confess the latter concerns me, but we'll see. The same sex marriage one I've always seen as our culture going temporarily insane, kinda like guys in girls sports, etc. That is, if two homosexual men (or women) want to enter into a covenant to remain as a connected couple, legally responsible to the relationship, i.e. civil union, they should have no problem doing that. But marriage, by definition, is between a man and a woman, which preserves the incubator that has the best chance of properly rearing our progeny. That's why marriage exists at all.

This decision, coupled with the unravelling of wokeness at companies throughout the country as well as the end to guys competing in sports as women, and the success of "What is a Woman" and many more similar documentaries to follow, is a welcome and way overdue return to sanity in the US.

The good news is that they will be more "local". e.g. here in Kentucky Pelosi (and therefore the voters of California) won't have a say. That is huge.

Kind of getting away from the original premise of the thread, folks. Roe v. Wade, states rights, women's rights, right to life are all well-worn topics for debate here and elsewhere. Done to death. I specifically wanted to know whether anybody thought the SCOTUS decision today might give a back-handed boost to the Dems in the mid-terms or are they still screwed?

I'm betting the GQP has shot itself in the pecker over all of this.

Folks paying attention have proof today that the GQP plays the long game effectively. For fifty years they have been stacking courts and ginning the base to vote for this day. Showing they will not stop until their goals are accomplished.

This is just the beginning!


The Christian Fascist party

For better or worse:
Donald Trump's lasting legacy will now be the overturning of Roe v. Wade
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/24/polit...acy/index.html

I'm thinking that too, especially if SCOTUS takes a run at contraception or same-sex marriage before November.

Yes, we know.

Next, fertilized eggs and zygotes will be deemed "persons". Watch for it, and the billboards advertising legal services for them.

If states want to mandate reproduction, they should be on the hook for medical and financial support.

Now I remember why I don't come here very much anymore.

Hard to say, both sides could be motivated to show up as mirror images of the issues.

I think it will, in the end, hurt the dems. The reason is simple but at least twofold. First, the population in general is NOT pro-choice, at least according to polls. That is, more people than not are against "abortion on demand at any and all stages of pregnancy".

Second, as this is discussed, more and more people will reach the knowledge level to understand that this is really not about making abortion legal or illegal, but about getting the federal government out of it and giving it back to the states. This one is huge, because now politicians running for office in each state will have to take a stand, LOCALLY, on any abortion law. And this is where the first issue above will bite them.

However, that second one will help democrats in states like California and NY, but hurt them in the red states and, of significant importance, in the more purple states.

All IMO, of course. At least politics became more local with this decision - as it should be. Us Kentuckians don't like Schumer having much of a say in our politics here just as Californians don't like Rand Paul having much say in their politics.

Edit: There was also a lot of talk on the analysis shows yesterday about this meaning you can either try to change the laws in your own state or, if that is fruitless, move to one that aligns with your perspective. That one hits me close to home because that is exactly what I did. As my state (WA) moved farther and farther left in the 46 years I lived there, I felt more and more like a stranger, and I left for rural Kentucky in 2011. I've been embraced by the local people. We have a LOT more in common. I love it.

One step closer to an unaccountable theocracy facitilitated by ideological court stuffing with activist judges breaking presidents for an extremist Christian agenda.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/sup...trac-rcna35228

If the Dems are smart they'll play this to their advantage. The time for playing nice and fair is over.

Being the political arm of the GOP that they are they'll lay low on that until after the election. If the Dems are smart they'll capitalize on C. Thomas letting the cat out of the bag by signaling his intent to go after those after the Roe v. Wade ruling. The Repubs are responsible for the corrupted SC and they should be made to pay for that at the ballot box

Nothing extremist about it, and it is not just Christians.

And back at ya.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMSnDGSWsXY&t=300s

My take is that this will really play into the GOP's hands come November. Let's see which one of us called it best. It's only a few months away. :)

Inflation/recession is where it's at.

Yep. The dirty little secret is that although everyone has an opinion on Roe, it's a low priority regarding voting. And now that abortion is turned over to the states, the states are going to vote the way they were going to vote based on the other stuff that actually impacts all of us directly. And in the places of hotbed abortion support, they are "democrat only" districts anyway. That's why people like Pelosi and AOC are where they are.

Juneteenth is the holiday celebrating, when the Republicans freed the slaves from their evil Slave Master Owners, aka Elite Democrats/The KKK.
Then, on 24 June 2022, the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade!

Abortion kills 1,000 black babies every day in America. Abortion is not just a woman’s issue. It’s a human rights issue.

Abortion is the number one killer of black lives in the United States. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, abortion kills more black people than HIV, homicide, diabetes, accident, cancer, and heart disease … combined.

In 2019, black women had 38.4% of all abortions in the U.S., despite African-Americans comprising only 12.4% of the total population.

In Michigan, black women make up only about 14% of Michigan’s female population, but they had 55.4% of all abortions reported in the state in 2020.*

https://pics.onsizzle.com/democrats-...ir-6898800.png

All that proves is that the two parties have had some serious role reversal in the ensuing 157 years.

I don't think that is true.
Lyndon Johnson: “I'll have them ni**ers voting Democratic for the next two hundred years. [Said to two governors regarding the Civil Rights Act of 1964, according to then-Air Force One steward Robert MacMillan]”

And from the Huffington Post: The Democratic Party's Two-Facedness of Race Relations

It's a great, and pretty short, read.

I honestly don't know where people get the idea that the role ever reversed. I mean, Senator Robert Byrd was both Democrat Senator and was also elected Exalted Cyclops in his local KKK organization. He left the Senate in 2010 by dying.

Useful and enlightening information about Robert Byrd.

And, finally, abortion ends a much larger percentage of black pregnancies than any other race. i.e. it can be easily argued that supporting it is basic racism. Which party tends to support it?

Finally, look at the numbers regarding each party's vote tally in both the house and senate regarding the Civil rights act of 1964

So, again, what gives people the belief that the roles reversed?

After the Democrat led Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 most members of the racist wing of the Democratic Party, aka Dixiecrats, became REPUBLICANS.

https://www.history.com/news/how-the...mocratic-south

Yes the SC decision on Roe v. Wade will help the Dems in the 2022 midterm elections.

As for the narrative that Dems were going to be screwed in the 2022 midterm elections, IMO that is a Repub fantasy.

Rebecca Solnit 13h ·

Today is George Orwell's 119th birthday. In his honor,
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
A CLUSTER OF CELLS INVISIBLE TO THE HUMAN EYE IS A PERSON AND A WOMAN IS NOT
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

The dog that caught the car': Republicans brace for the impact of reversing Roe.

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/20...g-roe-00042387

If the Dems are crafty they can take the Republican narrative away from inflation and gas prices. After all gas prices and inflations will come down at some point but the results of what the Repubs are gunning for will last for decades.

How low can the Repubs go ?????

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/25/ri-c...ne&par=xfinity

This, and the Jan 6 hearings. They need to prove they can walk and chew gum on the issues.

Each "defector" was a unique story. How many defected because they wanted out of the racist party. How many were simply fed up with the Democrats letting them down in other ways. The republican party had the track record of fighting the racists since Lincoln, so what prompted democrats to run to it?

We'll see. I think the opposite will happen. But staunchly blue states will probably remain blue. I expect some blue states, and especially the purple ones. to go red.

It's only a few months away. We'll soon know one way or the other.