Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SENATORS COLLINS AND MURKOWSKI JOINING DEMS TO INTRODUCE BILL TO CODIFY ROE
TWITTER ^ | 01 AUGUST 2022 | TIM SWAIN

Posted on 08/01/2022 2:35:56 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist

There's no link and I couldn't find a newsource, but this guy's sources are pretty good. If this is true I'm pretty much done with voting Republicans.

(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...


TOPICS: Health/Medicine
KEYWORDS: abortion; prolife; rinos; roevwade
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-132 next last
To: fidelis

How can the Congress codify a “right” that has been ruled unconstitional. I don’t think Congress can codify unconstitutional “rights” without amending the Constitution or having the Supreme Court reverse their decsion.

What am I missing?


21 posted on 08/01/2022 2:49:43 PM PDT by Babwa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

And right on cue, the RINO supporters and apologists rear their ugly heads.


22 posted on 08/01/2022 2:50:21 PM PDT by Mr. N. Wolfe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Well that does 3 things

The dems now blow up filibuster so it’s open season when we take over

It can be undone when we retake control easily and nationwide ban on abortions can happen

Throws a chance back to SCOTUS for a ruling protecting life of unborn nationwide


23 posted on 08/01/2022 2:50:31 PM PDT by pangaea6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

You are one of the most knee-jerk idiots on FR.
Go form your own little one imbecile third party. Good riddance.


24 posted on 08/01/2022 2:51:27 PM PDT by Artemis Webb (Be kind to each other, unless the other guy is a dumbass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

A federal law could specifically override the SCOTUS ruling. The SCOTUS vacated Roe because it was not codified in law or contained in the constitution as an enumerated right.


25 posted on 08/01/2022 2:52:48 PM PDT by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Babwa

Why are you asking me?


26 posted on 08/01/2022 2:52:50 PM PDT by fidelis (👈 Under no obligation to respond to rude, ignorant, abusive, bellicose, and obnoxious posts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
Maybe I’m missing something. But didn’t the Supreme Court kick the whole abortion thing back to the states? If that’s the case, no federal law can override that ruling. It would take a constitutional amendment.

Correct, it's un-Constitutional on its face. The USSC will slap it back down (if they have 60 votes to overcome the fillibuster or the Dem's nuke the fillibuster rule) faster than the Democrats will lose the House & Senate in 99 days.

27 posted on 08/01/2022 2:53:16 PM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Babwa

What legal meaning is there to “codify”?


28 posted on 08/01/2022 2:53:42 PM PDT by blackdog (Cooler King Joe, killing a winning nation every day. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Babwa

A modification of what I just wrote.
The so-called “right” is not subject to Federal law under the U.S. Constitution, which is why the States (based on their individual Constitutions may or may not have authority to codify aspects of it.


29 posted on 08/01/2022 2:54:27 PM PDT by Babwa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

And the big throw is on.

Lose in November and blame it on Trump.


30 posted on 08/01/2022 2:54:57 PM PDT by dfwgator (Endut! Hoch Hech!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pfflier
The SCOTUS vacated Roe because it was not codified in law or contained in the constitution as an enumerated right.

You're missing the most important part: they kicked the issue back to the States, because that's where it belongs. There's nothing in the Constitution of the United States of America that conveys a right to murder another human being.

Additionally, all rights not EXPRESSLEY conveyed to the Federal Government by the states, remains a States Rights issue.

31 posted on 08/01/2022 2:55:15 PM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
If that’s the case, no federal law can override that ruling. It would take a constitutional amendment.

Yep. But we can codify Roe by legislation. Then someone will file a suit. The SCOTUS will take a year to take the case. In the meantime, abortion will be legal in all 50 states.

32 posted on 08/01/2022 2:57:19 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

Probably can in Alaska. No way in Maine. Plus Collins is here until January 2027.


33 posted on 08/01/2022 2:57:20 PM PDT by napscoordinator (Trump/Hunter, jr for President/Vice President 2016 democratic )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

But remember, Trump could not do ANYTHING without 60 votes in the Senate.

But Biden can ram through wahtever he wants with 50 votes.


34 posted on 08/01/2022 2:57:30 PM PDT by imabadboy99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blackdog

Codify is the word the Left is using. USA Today defines is this way:

What does it mean to codify Roe v. Wade?
To codify something means to “arrange laws or rules into a systematic code,” according to Cornell Law’s Legal Information Institute.

When lawmakers say they want to “codify Roe” it means they want inscribe the abortion rights the ruling once protected into federal law.


35 posted on 08/01/2022 2:58:19 PM PDT by Babwa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: alancarp

Different animal, I agree.

Did you ever read how NEO con’s happened? Back years ago when the Warsaw Pact was a big threat and communism was expanding a group of slightly more pro-American democrats were unhappy with the soft stance being used by their party on the reds. So they split off and joined the republicans.

Basically all they had in common with conservatives was a more pro-military stance and a bit more nationalistic. They still had much more in common with leftist democrats in many, many areas like tax and spend, social programs etc.

Hence we got Bush’s, Chaneys, and now Murkowski and the like. I actually think we would have been better off if they would have stayed with the Dems as they seem to equally effective at blocking conservative movements.

(At least that’s how I remember reading it)


36 posted on 08/01/2022 2:58:47 PM PDT by Phoenix8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

This needs to be the final nail in Murkowski’s coffin. She’s unfit to represent Alaska.


37 posted on 08/01/2022 2:59:21 PM PDT by Kazan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nbenyo
"I think you should leave America. Your problem is not with Republicans, it is with American voters"

That's pretty arrogant coming from a Filipina and not a native born US citizen. STFU.

38 posted on 08/01/2022 3:00:06 PM PDT by wildcard_redneck (Germans are bat-crap crazy for cold showers, high energy bills, and boiled turnips.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

No doubt my two NevaDUH senators will counter that. Oh, never mind. Both useless as................


39 posted on 08/01/2022 3:03:50 PM PDT by rktman (Destroy America from within? Check! WTH? Enlisted USN 1967 to end up with this? 😕)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Purely symbolic, if I understand the Dobbs ruling.


40 posted on 08/01/2022 3:05:15 PM PDT by clintonh8r (Truth is hate speech to those who hate the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-132 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson