- Joined
- Oct 18, 2007
- Messages
- 32,061
- Reaction score
- 21,046
- Location
- East Coast - USA
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Will Trump, with an R congress do anything to jeopardize RvW?
Will Trump, with an R congress do anything to jeopardize RvW?
Will Trump, with an R congress do anything to jeopardize RvW?
They claim that that is on the agenda. But the problem they'll encounter is the Constitution itself. Roe v Wade was an admission by government that it had been Constitutionally denying women their right to abort since 1868, when the 14th Amendment was established. And the language contained in the 14th reaches into other Amendments. So women's right to abort are enmeshed with several Amendments - trying to overturn it will violate both equal protection under the law and due process under the law, not to mention unjustly denying liberty that includes the right to privacy.
Will Trump, with an R congress do anything to jeopardize RvW?
They ruled that it violated their rights to privacy and that is it. There is no right to abort.
To overturn it they would either have to do a constitutional amendment (not going to happen) or get the SCOTUS to overturn it (don't have the numbers unless like 3 judges kick the bucket).
Don't forget the financial costs to this nation. If people who are against abortion think that our tax system is crazy and unfair now. Having to substantially enhance all of the social services necessary to support an exponentially growing population of children born to those who considered them to be unwanted - will be a profound to taxpayers.
I mean, one problem is that during the course of this election, Trump just ran his mouth. We have really very little clue as to what he will end up doing in the end.
When he nominates someone like Rush Limbaugh to the supreme court, yes.
They ruled that it violated their rights to privacy and that is it. There is no right to abort.
Will Trump, with an R congress do anything to jeopardize RvW?
WTF is "RvW"?
Good point.
That "Make America Great Again" slogan was about as specific on policy as Trump got.
I think Trump has the big ego to want to be a great Prez
We'll just have to wait and see how things go.
Will Trump, with an R congress do anything to jeopardize RvW?
Good point.
That "Make America Great Again" slogan was about as specific on policy as Trump got.
I think Trump has the big ego to want to be a great Prez
We'll just have to wait and see how things go.
You're stating the usual by anti-abortion advocates because there is no explicit clause stating women have a right to have an abortion. Neither is "the right to privacy" explicitly stated in our Constitution, although we know it's inherent to the Constitution and without it, our Constitution would fall.
So your "no explicit right to abort" argument is impotent. And trying to narrow down the decision made by Justices in the Roe v Wade case to simply "a violation of right to privacy" is significantly short-changing what the full scope of the Court's considerations were.
If you wanted, you could go back in time to 2008 and substitute the name Obama for Trump in your statement and you'd be just as accurate. Hopefully, Trump will be more interested in the position than Obama was, but I'm not sure.
They claim that that is on the agenda. But the problem they'll encounter is the Constitution itself. Roe v Wade was an admission by government that it had been Constitutionally denying women their right to abort since 1868, when the 14th Amendment was established. And the language contained in the 14th reaches into other Amendments. So women's right to abort are enmeshed with several Amendments - trying to overturn it will violate both equal protection under the law and due process under the law, not to mention unjustly denying liberty that includes the right to privacy.
“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.
“Roe isn’t really about the woman’s choice, is it?” Ginsburg said. “It’s about the doctor’s freedom to practice…it wasn’t woman-centered, it was physician-centered.”
In his introduction for Ginsburg, Schill spoke of her ties to the Law School: Her late husband, Martin, was a Visiting Professor, her son, James, attended the law school before starting a classical music record label, and, Professor Aziz Huq was her clerk in 2003 and 2004. She’s also a longtime friend of Stone.
Roe v. Wade.
Presently 60 Senate votes are requiredOf course, no one truly knows, but Trump is not a social conservative - he's not a conservative at all - he's more in line with libertarians and Canadian conservatives, such as myself, who want smaller government and government out of our pockets and bedrooms. As such, I don't think there's a hope in hell that Trump will initiate any legislation related to abortion.
Secondly, as it stands now, Trump will be in a position to nominate a Supreme Court justice to replace Scalia - that replacement will likely be less conservative than Scalia, although I and other would hope he/she could be similar in thinking and application - so the Supreme Court will, virtually, remain as it has been since Obama took office. As long as Kennedy remains on the court, RvW will remain in force.
Finally, if and when Kennedy and Ginsberg either resign or die in office, their replacements may put in jeopardy the court's view on abortion depending on the status of the US Senate at the time of replacement. It's not inconceivable that either one or both will wait until the Senate is in Democrat hands before leaving the bench to ensure that, similar to Obama this past year, a Trump nominee does not get past committee unless Democrats support him/her.
In 1991, public opinion polls showed that the vast majority of those polled believed Thomas over Hill.[51] After extensive debate, the Committee sent the nomination to the full Senate without a recommendation either way. Thomas was confirmed by the Senate with a 52 to 48 vote on October 15, 1991,[52] the narrowest margin for approval in more than a century.
Will Trump, with an R congress do anything to jeopardize RvW?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?