How likely is it that Roe v. Wade will be overturned by next year?

[Callen]

Everybody appointed by conservatives for the last twenty years were groomed for this purpose. One way or another, RvW is going down.

Well that would be in keeping with America's record as being at the bottom of the list in terms of keeping pace with modern, western, democratic countries on social issues keeping them more in line with autocratic, oppressive countries.

 

[Chomsky]

IMHO, the only thing that may change is that “viability”, a term totally invented by the SCOTUS and not present anywhere within the Constitution, should not be kept. The basic idea of Roe vs. Wade was that defining a point beyond conception was (somehow?) necessary to make post conception birth control illegal by the states.

That would correctly allow state legislators to define when the intentional killing of a pre-born human constitutes homicide - as is currently allowed for state laws defining fetal homicide as a crime. States would still be required to allow abortion, up to some (well defined) point beyond conception, to be considered justifiable fetal homicide (or post-conception birth control) when authorized by the pregnant woman.

Great post, my friend!

 

[ttwtt78640]

With the questions I’m hearing today? It’s gone

The questions (and answers) made it obvious that including a “viability” condition made Roe v. Wade a political rather than a legal or Constitutionally based SCOTUS decision. Once it has been agreed that it was a matter of defining some point between conception and birth - the only matter left to ponder is whether the Constitution has or has not defined that point. If the Constitution cannot be shown to have done so then abortion is a matter left to the several states or to the people (via Constitutional amendment?) to decide.

 

[Chomsky]

I think it will be overturned on the basis it is not a Constitutional issue but rather a legislative issue. This means the Red States will ban it, the Blue States and the Purple States will allow abortion under certain parameters. The Federal Government will never have the " cojones" to pass federal legislation just like they don't touch immigration......and then women on the left, right and centre will show the asses in DC who is really in charge.

??

Of course it's a Constitutional issue! All "rights" issues are!

 

[ALiberalModerate]

When I posed the question seven months ago, folks seemed overwhelmingly convinced Roe was safe. Just checking in on the temperature today.

Supreme Court conservatives look ready to gut Roe v. Wade during arguments in Mississippi abortion case

The case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, marks the most significant challenge to abortion rights in decades.

www.cnbc.com

The Supreme Court Seems Poised to Overturn Roe v. Wade

Completely overturned, not that likely. Effectively overturned, very likely.

 

[AGENT J]

I say the same in this thread i say in them all

Very unlikely

1.) to much precedence for it

2.) America is not going backward, there's a reason the vast majority of first world countries with governments based on rights and freedoms have laws that are prochoice
Countries that dont are typically countries that do not have governments based on rights and freedoms like dictatorships and theocracies and communist countries.

America will not be violating the current legal, civil, equal and human rights of women making them lesser and 2nd class citizens any time soon.

Now with that side RvW falling alone wouldn't do that, it would go to the states (which should never be the case on this topic)
but a bunch a nutters are sure to get together and make vile state laws that will be challenged and kicked right back up to SCOTUS making abortion even more sound.

somebody said today 12 states already have pseudo-laws passed to cater to the nutters that if RvW falls abortion is banned in those states and then boom back up it goes on challenges

this is typically the path many things against rights usually take. One of the biggest reasons we have equal marriage rights is because nutters and bigots couldn't leave it alone. Their hate, fear and want to control others is exactly what made their fears come true lol

They made laws saying it was about marriage and religions which was proven a lie then they made laws against domestic partnerships and civil unions then BOOM that give the path to challenge those things and HELPED grant equality.

Its the same BS excuses against rights that have been tried over and over again in history and it typically has the opposite effect.
Good luck but women will not be made into second class citizens which is what they will try as soon as some state trys to claim the nutter idea personhood is at conception

 

[Nomad4Ever]

America is dead.

Not yet.

 

[Chomsky]

Maybe......if it becomes a state issue, then expect to see a lot of moving vans and red states being dominated by men. They'll have to drive to a blue state to find a wife. lol

LMAO!

I knew I like you, from the moment you trotted into the place! Great line!

 

[Rexedgar]

Still not likely.

To overturn 50 years of SCOTUS precedence & jurisprudence takes one hell of an argument - and Mississippi hasn't made it.

See post # 24, Republicans play the long game; see the gerrymandering and election laws being passed through state legislatures as we text.

 

[Callen]

Of course it's a Constitutional issue! All "rights" issues are!

Are " all " rights or just specific rights spelled out? Remember there are several conservative "originalists" on the Supreme Court

 

[Chomsky]

Well that would be in keeping with America's record as being at the bottom of the list in terms of keeping pace with modern, western, democratic countries on social issues keeping them more in line with autocratic, oppressive countries.

Well said, Callen. I fully agree.

 

[btthegreat]

Still not likely.

To overturn 50 years of SCOTUS precedence & jurisprudence takes one hell of an argument - and Mississippi hasn't made it.

I hope you are right, but this is all based on one unproven premise. That the conservative majority sitting on that court, even paid the slightest attention to the legal arguments sitting in the briefs and in oral argument. I wish you the very best of good fortune on that premise, Chomsky.

 

[Rexedgar]

The only reason that Mississippi brought this case now, is because of the changed make up of the SCOTUS.

 

[Chomsky]

Are " all " rights or just specific rights spelled out? Remember there are several conservative "originalists" on the Supreme Court

True. Your point is taken

My concern was with your characterization.

But, I still don't see Roe going anywhere . . .

 

[Nomad4Ever]

But, I still don't see Roe going anywhere . . .

What would you do if it did?

 

[Chomsky]

The questions (and answers) made it obvious that including a “viability” condition made Roe v. Wade a political rather than a legal or Constitutionally based SCOTUS decision. Once it has been agreed that it was a matter of defining some point between conception and birth - the only matter left to ponder is whether the Constitution has or has not defined that point. If the Constitution cannot be shown to have done so then abortion is a matter left to the several states or to the people (via Constitutional amendment?) to decide.

You make a good argument here, but that still leaves the 'women's' bodily rights issue.

It's all very complex . . .

 

[Gaius46]

Not likely.

Could states be given more leeway in defining when abortions can be done? Yes. But an outright ban isn’t happening.

Hell even 90% of Texans don’t want an outright ban.

 

[Chomsky]

What would you do if it did?

As I always do, I accept the ruling & support the Constitution & rule of law.

BTW - I have no dog in this hunt. I do have my personal mores on the matter though, but I don't impress them on my fellow Americans.

 

[Chomsky]

Not likely.

Could states be given more leeway in defining when abortions can be done? Yes. But an outright ban isn’t happening.

Hell even 90% of Texans don’t want an outright ban.

Bingo!

It's a balance between state rights & the federal requirement to protect individual citizen's rights.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

As I always do, I accept the ruling & support the Constitution & rule of law.

The constitution and "rule of law" at various points in time have;
- legalized slavery
- criminalized alcohol
- criminalized same sex marriage
- legalized Jim Crow laws
- banned women from voting

I would hold women to absolutely zero expectation to support, follow, or respect the rule of law if a state criminalized abortion.

 

[ttwtt78640]

??

Of course it's a Constitutional issue! All "rights" issues are!

In this case the assertion is that the SCOTUS can create a new conditional (women’s?) right out of thin air (interpreting the 9A - abortion as conditionally private post conception birth control?), despite neither the right nor the condition used appearing anywhere in the Constitution. The 10A clearly indicated that was far from the founders intent.

 

[The Man]

I mean, baby murdering isn't my thing, but to each their own.

 

[weaver2]

When I posed the question seven months ago, folks seemed overwhelmingly convinced Roe was safe. Just checking in on the temperature today.

Supreme Court conservatives look ready to gut Roe v. Wade during arguments in Mississippi abortion case

The case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, marks the most significant challenge to abortion rights in decades.

www.cnbc.com

The Supreme Court Seems Poised to Overturn Roe v. Wade

It's too early in the deliberations to say "I told you so", but, "I told you so"

 

[ttwtt78640]

You make a good argument here, but that still leaves the 'women's' bodily rights issue.

It's all very complex . . .

Where does recreational drug use fall under the (9A?) privacy and bodily autonomy (my body my choice?) rights “issue”?

Once rights are said to be conditional (non-absolute?) then the states should be free (or at least much freer) to act. That is certainly used to the max when discussing our 2A rights.

 

[trouble13]

When I posed the question seven months ago, folks seemed overwhelmingly convinced Roe was safe. Just checking in on the temperature today.

Supreme Court conservatives look ready to gut Roe v. Wade during arguments in Mississippi abortion case

The case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, marks the most significant challenge to abortion rights in decades.

www.cnbc.com

The Supreme Court Seems Poised to Overturn Roe v. Wade

If the law is going to continue to use draconian measures to force men into fatherhood I fully support anti-abortion laws forcing women to be mothers too.

Accountability should be a two way street.