Roe v. Wade Overturned (1 Viewer)

[Dr_Zaius]

Biden isn’t waiting until the actual decision is released. He’s speaking about this tomorrow. 

I hope he doesn't, or if he does he keeps the remarks very perfunctory.  We don't actually know what the decision is, because this is a draft.  It's irresponsible to pour gasoline on the fire.  The final official decision could be completely different (probably not, but could).  The CNN chyron had Obamacare getting overturned for a few minutes (I know because I was watching in an airport at the time), and there's a good chance it's because Roberts changed his opinion somewhat late in the game.

 

[lazyike]

Looks like a leak going on.  That cant be good.  Going beyond the decision (that they have not ruled yet)…that this memo was leaked?   Also big news.   

If the SC Justices figure out who leaked this I wouldn't want to be them. Their days working in the legal field would be over wouldn't it?

 

[Summer Wheat]

Let’s remember that 69% of Americans oppose overturning Roe. Only 30% are in favor: 

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/01/21/politics/cnn-poll-abortion-roe-v-wade/index.html

That is Joe Biden territory.

 

[timschochet]

I imagine most college campuses in this country are up in arms over this news or they will be when they hear it. Let’s hope that they can channel their rage and turn it into something positive. 
There will be protests as well. Remember all the conservatives around here who argued that it was perfectly OK to block traffic to protest vaccine mandates? Get ready. 

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I hope he doesn't, or if he does he keeps the remarks very perfunctory.  We don't actually know what the decision is, because this is a draft.  It's irresponsible to pour gasoline on the fire.  The final official decision could be completely different (probably not, but could).

Even if it were a published decision rather than a purported draft, I don't think Presidents should comment on constitutional opinions made by the judicial branch. Obama was wrong to do so on Citizens United, IMO, and Biden would be wrong to do so on Dobbs.

 

[timschochet]

Just received a text from my daughter: protests  organized by PP for May 14, a week from Saturday. This one in Santa Ana but all around the nation. 

 

[thecatch]

The leak sucks, really, no matter who did it.

Lawyerguys, who else might have access besides a clerk?

We’d need a former SCOTUS clerk to confirm who is on these distribution lists or who has access to the justice’s official email accounts. I imagine the justices’ assistants have access in addition to clerks. I wouldn’t be surprised if the clerk of the court and some of his/her staff is copied when drafts are circulated. 

 

[ZADO]

Let’s remember that 69% of Americans oppose overturning Roe. Only 30% are in favor: 

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/01/21/politics/cnn-poll-abortion-roe-v-wade/index.html

Its 49 % vs 47 %  according to this poll 2021 , i believe late term abortion is a turning point for most even if its not that common, just the thought turns rational thinking people off 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/225975/share-of-americans-who-are-pro-life-or-pro-choice/

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The CNN chyron had Obamacare getting overturned for a few minutes (I know because I was watching in an airport at the time), and there's a good chance it's because Roberts changed his opinion somewhat late in the game.

It was because they didn't read the opinion past the part about how the Affordable Care Act is not authorized by the Commerce Clause.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

The left usually remains civil and peaceful when they don't get their way so we should be good.

 

[timschochet]

Even if it were a published decision rather than a purported draft, I don't think Presidents should comment on constitutional opinions made by the judicial branch. Obama was wrong to do so on Citizens United, IMO, and Biden would be wrong to do so on Dobbs.

Why not? 

Actually I get your reasoning on a purely intellectual level. But in reality Biden would look incredibly weak if he refused to comment. 

 

[John123]

Just received a text from my daughter: protests  organized by PP for May 14, a week from Saturday. This one in Santa Ana but all around the nation. 

Sure, this affects their bottom line and ability to sell babies.  Any business would protest.

 

[lazyike]

No matter what one's view is on abortion I expect the suicide rate to go up for women ( particularly younger women) once this decision kicks in.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

We’d need a former SCOTUS clerk to confirm who is on these distribution lists or who has access to the justice’s official email accounts. I imagine the justices’ assistants have access in addition to clerks. I wouldn’t be surprised if the clerk of the court and some of his/her staff is copied when drafts are circulated. 

I'd kind of expect a copy emailed among SCOTUS personnel to be a true electronic version rather than a PDF made from a scanned image. But I don't know...

 

[Sea Duck]

Pro-life versus pro-choice arguments seem really boring in this thread. Let's try to keep this focused on the Supreme Court, the leak, the legal reasoning in Roe, the political implications of reversing Roe, etc. -- not on whether abortion is moral or immoral. (The moral argument is entirely separate from the legal argument.)

From a political standpoint, this will ultimately be bad for the Republican Party.

Blue states will be unaffected, but red states will struggle to attend to the millions of unwanted children -- causing a short-term burden on the welfare system, and a long-term burden on the criminal justice system.

As a pro-lifer, I have mixed feelings. I would prefer to see abortion outlawed equally throughout the country. But I also believe that there are several "red" states in this country that enjoy a higher level of influence than they deserve. And overturning Roe will eventually cause those states to lose some of their influence, bringing them back down to a more appropriate level.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

I won’t lie. When I saw the headline for this my first thought was…. Is this the day the PSF gets shut down. 

Started to make a joke, then realized that was the kind of thing that could actually lead to that result.

 

[Summer Wheat]

Why not? 

Actually I get your reasoning on a purely intellectual level. But in reality Biden would look incredibly weak if he refused to comment. 

Let this play out, there is no need to comment right now.  The country is in disarray with enough problems he can`t handle.

 

[timschochet]

Sure, this affects their bottom line and ability to sell babies.  Any business would protest.

So awful. 

 

[timschochet]

Sure, this affects their bottom line and ability to sell babies.  Any business would protest.

The board doesn’t deserve to be shut down. But IMO, people who make ugly comments like this one, do. 

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Other Republican Presidents wouldn’t have made such hardline appointments. At least they haven’t. 
Trump said he would and he did. You’ve got to give him that. 

Hard disagree. Especially after Roberts' ACA decision, any future GOP president was going to face a huge amount of pressure to appoint a no-doubt Federalist Society type. I see no reason to think that Gorsuch, Kavanagh and ACB would have been deemed unacceptable by a President Rubio, Cruz or Jeb Bush. 

 

[thecatch]

I'd kind of expect a copy emailed among SCOTUS personnel to be a true electronic version rather than a PDF made from a scanned image. But I don't know...

I don’t think the leaker would have been dumb enough to forward it electronically. They’d have printed it and given a hard copy to a reporter, or scanned it to a PDF again and mailed it from a more personal / less traceable email account. And I think there’s a near zero chance this was just printed and accidentally left out where someone else could grab it. 

 

[timschochet]

Hard disagree. Especially after Roberts' ACA decision, any future GOP president was going to face a huge amount of pressure to appoint a no-doubt Federalist Society type. I see no reason to think that Gorsuch, Kavanagh and ACB would have been deemed unacceptable by a President Rubio, Cruz or Jeb Bush. 

Well we don’t know. You could be right. But here’s what we DO know: Trump’s the only one who’s done it. 

 

[John123]

The board doesn’t deserve to be shut down. But IMO, people who make ugly comments like this one, do. 

This is rich coming from you, given some of the things you've said.  And what I posted is factually correct.  If anything is sick about it, it's the fact that PP doesn't get taken to task for their business practices. 

 

[rockaction]

Amazing how a right invented out of whole cloth became such a flashpoint. Perhaps we should go back to 1965, when Douglas found penumbras emanating from the Constitution instead of relying on what the Constitution actually textually said about privacy and the state or even a nod to something that the Constitution originally intended. 

I'm pro-choice because I don't believe there's an effective mechanism to enforce abortion without getting as draconian in certain ways as the flash bang searches pertaining to the drug war have gotten. 

But to lambaste the Court over its jurisprudential decision when the Warren Court was just making up rights willy-nilly is something else to behold. It shows a breakdown of federalism and a breakdown of trust and a disconnect between the state representatives now thrust into play and their constituents. 

Believe me, I've gotten older and come to appreciate the protections these rights afford. But the radicalism came from back in '65, not today. 

 

[sho nuff]

If the SC Justices figure out who leaked this I wouldn't want to be them. Their days working in the legal field would be over wouldn't it?

Should be. 

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

According to Twitter, the opinion in Roe was also prematurely leaked. Time Magazine published a story announcing the decision a few hours before the Court officially announced it. (Time got a bit unlucky that its exclusive scoop didn't last very long.)

 

[rockaction]

That said, the last thing we need as a country right now are more protests and culture warriors going on the offensive or defensive. This already felt like '68; it's going to get worse for those of us just hoping for the status quo. 

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Even if it were a published decision rather than a purported draft, I don't think Presidents should comment on constitutional opinions made by the judicial branch. Obama was wrong to do so on Citizens United, IMO, and Biden would be wrong to do so on Dobbs.

Respectfully disagree. I don't buy the middle-school civics explanation that the legislature creates the law, the executive enforces it and the judiciary interprets it. I think it's far more complex than that. IMO every government official has a role to play in constitutional interpretation. Obama had a right to express his view on CU, and he could work with Congress on legislation that would reflect that view. That doesn't mean he could ignore the SC or overrule it, but it also doesn't mean he had to shut up about it.

 

[ZADO]

Wouldnt this go to the voting booth in 2024 and be decided by we the people ?

 

[timschochet]

This is rich coming from you, given some of the things you've said.  And what I posted is factually correct.  If anything is sick about it, it's the fact that PP doesn't get taken to task for their business practices. 

If I wrote what I really think of your comments I would be suspended. So I won’t. It’s enough to say that they’re false and disgusting. I’ll leave it at that. 

 

[timschochet]

Wouldnt this go to the voting booth in 2024 and be decided by we the people ?

Hopefully the vote in 2022 will reflect what the public wants for this issue. 

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I don’t think the leaker would have been dumb enough to forward it electronically. They’d have printed it and given a hard copy to a reporter, or scanned it to a PDF again and mailed it from a more personal / less traceable email account. And I think there’s a near zero chance this was just printed and accidentally left out where someone else could grab it. 

The document has a physical stamp on it in the upper right corner of the first page. So it was already a hard copy at some point, not just an electronic version, before the leaker got hold of it.

 

[jm192]

Why not? 

Actually I get your reasoning on a purely intellectual level. But in reality Biden would look incredibly weak if he refused to comment. 

Would it be better for the POTUS to undermine and question the validity of the court?

 

[glvsav37]

Who cares who leaked it? It’s of no importance at this point. 

And who knows? Maybe it will cause such a backlash that the red wave everybody is expecting in November won’t happen. Here’s hoping. 

sometimes 1 + 1 does = 2  

 

[lazyike]

Even if it were a published decision rather than a purported draft, I don't think Presidents should comment on constitutional opinions made by the judicial branch. Obama was wrong to do so on Citizens United, IMO, and Biden would be wrong to do so on Dobbs.

I think politicians on both side of the aisle should avoid making comments at the very least until this is verified and officially  released by the SC

 

[Zow]

This looks genuine to me (as a draft): https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000180-874f-dd36-a38c-c74f98520000

Me too. 

 

[Shula-holic]

I think politicians on both side of the aisle should avoid making comments at the very least until this is verified and officially  released by the SC

I agree that would be nice but I think they’ll all be on the bullhorns tomorrow. 

 

[Van Dyman]

No matter what one's view is on abortion I expect the suicide rate to go up for women ( particularly younger women) once this decision kicks in.

Yep. Sadly, I lost a friend that way. She was 14.

 

[thecatch]

The document has a physical stamp on it in the upper right corner of the first page. So it was already a hard copy at some point, not just an electronic version, before the leaker got hold of it.

Are you sure that’s a physical stamp? Could be electronic and just a little warped after being scanned. In any event, the universe of people that would have email access to an electronic copy is likely the same or very similar to those who have access to physically distributed copies. As I noted before, I don’t think someone just left this laying around accidentally. 

 

[krista4]

Amazing how a right invented out of whole cloth became such a flashpoint. Perhaps we should go back to 1965, when Douglas found penumbras emanating from the Constitution instead of relying on what the Constitution actually textually said about privacy and the state or even a nod to something that the Constitution originally intended. 

I'm pro-choice because I don't believe there's an effective mechanism to enforce abortion without getting as draconian in certain ways as the flash bang searches pertaining to the drug war have gotten. 

But to lambaste the Court over its jurisprudential decision when the Warren Court was just making up rights willy-nilly is something else to behold. It shows a breakdown of federalism and a breakdown of trust and a disconnect between the state representatives now thrust into play and their constituents. 

Believe me, I've gotten older and come to appreciate the protections these rights afford. But the radicalism came from back in '65, not today. 

This is a reasonable and interesting argument.  And such a relief from the "Planned Parenthood sells babies" level of discourse.  

 

[timschochet]

Yep. Sadly, I lost a friend that way. She was 14.

I’m so sorry

 

[rockaction]

IMO every government official has a role to play in constitutional interpretation

I will bet you dollars to donuts that Maurile knows this. It's hammered home at law school that every gov't official has his or her own thoughts on what is constitutional. The question becomes one of official roles and official capacities. 

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

A theory I don't think has been posted in this thread, but seems as possible as any other:

"There's a third possibility, which might be most plausible: Roberts is doing his institutionalist best to court Kavanaugh and/or Barrett away from a full overrule of Roe and someone wants to deter that defection by documenting that they both initially voted to end it."

https://twitter.com/stevenmazie/status/1521298950011207680

 

[rockaction]

This is a reasonable and interesting argument.  And such a relief from the "Planned Parenthood sells babies" level of discourse.  

Thanks, k4. I actually thought it might be a bit of an extreme jurisprudential take on things, considering I also think that the federal government wasn't supposed to interfere with the states on Bill of Rights questions nearly at all. In other words, I question, like Hugo Black, incorporation in general. 

It's a weird position to passionately believe that the world should have the privacy protections outlined in Griswold yet also believe the decision to have been wrongly decided. 

You won't get a "Planned Parenthood sells babies" argument here because I'm really not an extremist either way about my position. I think -- rather strongly -- that enforcement mechanisms couldn't ever be narrowly tailored enough to not trample rights we hope we're given as a function of autonomous living vis a vis our government. Whether people think those rights derive from thoughts about those things "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty" or natural rights from God, they both seem to go to a privacy or autonomy that we seek in our lives. 

 

[squistion]

Data for Progress  @DataProgress 2h

There is not a single state where support for a federal ban on abortion has more than 30% support among the public.

https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2021/12/10/a-federal-ban-on-abortion-is-wildly-unpopular-in-all-50-states

 

[Van Dyman]

Single issue voters. If they got what they wanted, would they now feel free to prioritize other issues...expect better candidates, more competent candidates, more moderate candidates?

 

[glvsav37]

forgive me for not being a legal scholar, but this is a "opinion draft" What does that mean? 

• Is it a rough draft of an argument that Justice Alito is making to the the rest of the SC?
• Is this a draft of something that will already decided and become an official ruling? 

I just dont understand/need clarity on the legal lingo
 

 

[cockroach]

Just heard an interesting fact... The USA is one of only seven countries in the world that allows abortions after 20 weeks.  The others are Canada, China, Netherlands, North Korea, Singapore, and Vietnam.

I bet any amount of money that this isn't a "fact" 

 

[Shula-holic]

Data for Progress  @DataProgress 2h

There is not a single state where support for a federal ban on abortion has more than 30% support among the public.

https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2021/12/10/a-federal-ban-on-abortion-is-wildly-unpopular-in-all-50-states

A couple of things here. 

Isn’t Roe a ruling supporting rights on a federal level, therefore a reversal kicks it back to the individual states?  If so, this isn’t a federal ban. 

Also, I find it hard to believe banning abortion wouldn’t poll over 50% in my state. Politicians run ads on it constantly and run as hard right as they can on it. 
 

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Amazing how a right invented out of whole cloth became such a flashpoint. Perhaps we should go back to 1965, when Douglas found penumbras emanating from the Constitution instead of relying on what the Constitution actually textually said about privacy and the state or even a nod to something that the Constitution originally intended. 

I'm pro-choice because I don't believe there's an effective mechanism to enforce abortion without getting as draconian in certain ways as the flash bang searches pertaining to the drug war have gotten. 

But to lambaste the Court over its jurisprudential decision when the Warren Court was just making up rights willy-nilly is something else to behold. It shows a breakdown of federalism and a breakdown of trust and a disconnect between the state representatives now thrust into play and their constituents. 

Believe me, I've gotten older and come to appreciate the protections these rights afford. But the radicalism came from back in '65, not today. 

I took an amazing poli sci class in college on the Constitution, and I remember reading a really persuasive argument in favor of the Griswold decision. I wish I could remember the details, but it had something to do with the 9th Amendment serving as a sort of "key" to unlock the concept of unenumerated rights (I also think it may have been more about Goldberg's concurring opinion than Douglas' majority one). It's late right now, but if I have time tomorrow I'll see if I can find some commentary on Goldberg that reflects what I'm talking about. I will concede that "emanations and penumbras" was a dumb phrase to use if for no other reason than its inherent mockability.