- Joined
- Apr 29, 2012
- Messages
- 17,875
- Reaction score
- 8,366
- Location
- On an island. Not that one!
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
Sen. Braun open to U.S. Supreme Court rescinding ruling that legalized interracial marriage
U.S. Sen. Mike Braun, R-Ind., would welcome the U.S. Supreme Court rescinding its 1967 ruling that legalized interracial marriage nationwide in favor of allowing each of the 50 states to decide such issues on its own.
Speaking Tuesday on a conference call with Indiana reporters, the Hoosier senator unambiguously declared his belief that many of the high court's key civil rights decisions of the past 70 years were wrongly decided and an improper usurpation of states' rights.
Braun initially limited his claim to the national right to abortion established by the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision he hopes the current, more conservative, Supreme Court will overturn in coming months when it rules in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.
But, when asked by The Times, Braun admitted there are many Supreme Court decisions he believes improperly established federal rights that would be better handled on a state-by-state basis, including Loving v. Virginia that legalized interracial marriage, and Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) establishing a right to privacy concerning contraceptive use.
Braun later walked back his comments by claiming he misunderstood the question, despite the question being asked multiple times in different ways to ensure Braun meant and understood what he said concerning interracial marriage.
How refreshing to see the familiar GOP bias and ignorance-------a constant we can always rely on in an unstable world.Certainly looks like Senator Braun (R-IN), believes states should allow discrimination against certain individuals and prohibition of various legal practices. What this would mean for many Americans is being banned from traveling across the nation, as their legal status in one state would be considered illegal in other states and therefore subject such persons to arrest or imposition of fines.
Someone, probably an aide, must have whispered to him that he had made a boo-boo when he included interracial marriage in his list of items to be done away with.
??????? That's the way it is nowSome people think that maybe the future of this country lies in more states' rights.
It would become a federation of states.
People could then move to a state that has their particular cultural values.
It would be a win-win for everyone.
Really???????? That's the way it is now
yes, really. What are you thinking????Really?
There is good reason to oppose federal anti-lynching laws, and that’s because the federal government should not possess plenary power and does not under the constitution of 1787. Although that’s moot point since the constitution of 1787 is not the de facto constitution.I imagine he would have opposed federal anti-lynching laws, too, wanting the states to handle it. Local is presumably always preferable, but people have always looked to Washington DC when they get no answer from Jackson, MS.
People could then move to a state that has their particular cultural values.
Contraceptives should absolutely be banned because they encourage selfish behavior.Which states' "cultural values" would lead them to ban contraceptives and interracial marriage if the GOP had its way and overturned the landmark precedents? I have some guesses!
Well, if this were a federation of truly independent states, each state could pass any law it wanted,yes, really. What are you thinking????
it does nowWell, if this were a federation of truly independent states, each state could pass any law it wanted,
true--------but few issues get past the state supreme courts. About .1%, if that...There would be no federal Supreme Court.
tyhat is the way it is heading nowState A might allow abortion, but it might be a felony in state B.
see aboveState C might have no bail for sucker punchers, but it might be a felony in state D.
like nowAmericans could then move to the state where they would feel most comfortable.
Certainly looks like Senator Braun (R-IN), believes states should allow discrimination against certain individuals and prohibition of various legal practices. What this would mean for many Americans is being banned from traveling across the nation, as their legal status in one state would be considered illegal in other states and therefore subject such persons to arrest or imposition of fines.
Someone, probably an aide, must have whispered to him that he had made a boo-boo when he included interracial marriage in his list of items to be done away with.
wowSome people think that maybe the future of this country lies in more states' rights.
It would become a federation of states.
People could then move to a state that has their particular cultural values.
It would be a win-win for everyone.
mainly old or flaccid people say that. or maybe those who never had a sex drive.Contraceptives should absolutely be banned because they encourage selfish behavior.
It would mean the end of the USA and a massive blow to freedom in the world. We need to stay united and let the racists die out. Not make a State just for them.Some people think that maybe the future of this country lies in more states' rights.
It would become a federation of states.
People could then move to a state that has their particular cultural values.
It would be a win-win for everyone.
So I take that you hate the idea of interracial marriage, too?Some people think that maybe the future of this country lies in more states' rights.
It would become a federation of states.
People could then move to a state that has their particular cultural values.
It would be a win-win for everyone.
They should have worn their white hoods, it would have made it more honest.Your gop folks. Your gop
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?