• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Brett Kavanaugh Just Declared War on Roe v. Wade

ludin said:
Kavanaugh's opinion though is spot on and agree's with the appeals court.
there is no war against roe vs wade.

the plantiffs have to offer that an undo burden exists. he even acknowledge that one would exist if the 3 doctors could
not get admitting privs to their hospitals and at that point in time could run foul of the law.

but they had 45 days to get that done before the law took affect.
again this was only a ruling on a stay not the actual law itself.

usually the courts should not rule on something unless someone can produce and actual harm.
since no harm was done and the law has not taken affect yet he was 100% right.
Click to expand...

And yet chief justice Roberts, a conservative jurist, disagrees with his and your opinion.
 
Superfly said:
Show of hands. Anybody surprised at this? Anybody?

Bueller? Bueller?
Click to expand...
Nobody should be.

Just like Connor, Scalia, Alito, Roberts, Thomas, and Gorsuch before him, Kavanaugh lied through his teeth about his intentions to enforce precedents he disagrees with.

IMHO, there should be a price to pay for this by the right. There's a weapon Dems can use, but I don't believe they have the balls for it.
 
JMR said:
And yet chief justice Roberts, a conservative jurist, disagrees with his and your opinion.
Click to expand...
But how long will that realistically last?

I don't think Roberts wants to overturn Roe, not because he doesn't have a religious axe to grind with it, but because he doesn't want to undermine the credibility of the court. While I'd be pleasantly surprised to see him respect the precedent, I don't expect him to do so for long.

Make no mistake, Roberts will begin to undercut Roe in his rulings, it's just a matter of when.
 
Rogue Valley said:
ludin's on a mission from God.
Click to expand...

tenor.gif
 
MovingPictures said:
But how long will that realistically last?

I don't think Roberts wants to overturn Roe, not because he doesn't have a religious axe to grind with it, but because he doesn't want to undermine the credibility of the court. While I'd be pleasantly surprised to see him respect the precedent, I don't expect him to do so for long.

Make no mistake, Roberts will begin to undercut Roe in his rulings, it's just a matter of when.
Click to expand...

I agree that Roberts wants desperately to not oversee a court that undermines the credibility of the institution, but the right wing wants that precisely, a non credible bunch of goons who deliver on their issues. They are not even reluctant to admit as much, as we have seen posted here time and time again.
 
Superfly said:
Too bad she didn't listen when everybody told her she was wrong.
Click to expand...
He wrote a dissent - something that happens after almost every decision. Let's pull out his fingernails, waterboard him for a couple of hours and send him to Gitmo. :roll:
 
Bullseye said:
So if something goes wrong, she can be admitted immediately without having to go through ER?
Click to expand...
If something goes wrong she is headed for the ER regardless. In other words the requirement is bull crap.
 
prometeus said:
If something goes wrong she is headed for the ER regardless. In other words the requirement is bull crap.
Click to expand...
Where did you get your medical degree?
 
Rogue Valley said:
Brett Kavanaugh Just Declared War on Roe v. Wade

90




Despite his dishonest protestations at his confirmation hearing, Kavanaugh exactly where I thought the douche-bag would be regarding abortion.
Click to expand...

"The Louisiana statute is a direct violation of the Supreme Court’s 2016 ruling in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt"

The lower court found the opposite, and Kavanaugh, if anything, took an extremely restrictive stance. Pro-Lifers find his position "ominous" if not quite the betrayal of Roberts.


...But if you read the dissent, it’s on the most narrow possible grounds. Essentially, he argues that there isn’t yet any evidence that the Louisiana law will have any immediate effect on abortion access. The state was implementing a 45-day transition period that could allow more doctors to obtain admitting privileges, and if they could not, then the doctors could file an “as-applied” complaint against the law, rather than a pre-enforcement challenge. Indeed, the entire dissent is painstakingly (and painfully) deferential to Whole Women’s Health and the Casey “undue burden” standard more broadly...
Click to expand...
 
Amazing you resort to name calling because a person votes to stop killing babies but you see those who are in favor of baby killing as saviors?
 
MovingPictures said:
Nobody should be.

Just like Connor, Scalia, Alito, Roberts, Thomas, and Gorsuch before him, Kavanaugh lied through his teeth about his intentions to enforce precedents he disagrees with.

IMHO, there should be a price to pay for this by the right. There's a weapon Dems can use, but I don't believe they have the balls for it.
Click to expand...


Hi MP,

Did you read his decision? What he was actually deciding on? I too thought it was about abortion itself, but it's not. He can be accused of ruling on exactly what's in front of him, instead of looking at the 'big picture', but this one, imo, is exactly that. And I'm pro-choice. :)
 
Kavanaugh likes beer. It helps him relieve his inhibitions to control women.
 
holbritter said:
Hi MP,

Did you read his decision? What he was actually deciding on? I too thought it was about abortion itself, but it's not. He can be accused of ruling on exactly what's in front of him, instead of looking at the 'big picture', but this one, imo, is exactly that. And I'm pro-choice. :)
Click to expand...
Um, the case is about access to abortion, what are you talking about?
 
prometeus said:
At least you admit that the requirement is bull crap.
Click to expand...
How is saying you have no knowledge to even judge the requirement "admitting it is BS"?
 
Last edited:
Dutch said:
So? Besides, Roberts, a Bush appointee, once again voted with the liberals. Republican politicians once again betraying their voting base by putting liberals on the supreme court.
Click to expand...

Roberts is not a liberal, but he is also not an idiot, the supreme court ruled on this a few years ago and that has to be respected. His vote has nothing to do with conservative or liberal but about constitutionality, and that should not be liberal or conservative. Sadly Kavanaugh is letting his anti-abortion views speak louder than his respect for the constitution and the supreme courts previous rulings.
 
Superfly said:
Show of hands. Anybody surprised at this? Anybody?

Bueller? Bueller?
Click to expand...

Perhaps it is time to bring Brett back to the House to hear and respond to testimony from his accusers who did not get to speak at his confirmation hearings? It is also apparent that he lied when he called Roe vs Wade "settled law". This was not his only lie either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom