Posted on 07/21/2022 12:25:33 PM PDT by Morgana
The House of Representatives on Thursday passed a bill to protect access to contraceptives on the federal level amid growing concerns that the conservative-majority Supreme Court could repeal that right.
Just eight GOP lawmakers crossed the aisle to vote for the bill. Two voted 'present,' and six Republicans did not vote at all.
The bill wound up passing in a 228 to 195 vote and now faces an uphill battle in the evenly-divided Senate.
It was introduced by North Carolina Democrat Rep. Kathy Manning last week.
House Democrats are rushing to protect privacy rights that they fear are now on the line after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last month, sending the issue of abortion back to the individual states.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, which rolled back Roe, specifies that the ruling only applies to the issue of abortion.
However, Justice Clarence Thomas set off alarm bells across the country when he wrote in a concurring opinion that the high court could revisit the landmark cases that legalized same-sex marriage, same-sex intimacy and contraceptives access.
Griswold v. Connecticut, decided in 1965, ruled that married couples had the right to buy and use contraceptives without government intervention. It was one of the three cases specifically named by Thomas.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
I heard his opinion mentioned Griswold as a case which could be reviewed.
I believe he mentioned Griswold as a badly decided case (which it was), but no one thinks it will ever be overturned.
Nancy Mace was one of the eight. More I find out about her the less I like her. Pro-gay marriage. Pro-pot legalization. Twice divorced. Now Pro-contraception. Done some anti-Trump stuff too hasn’t she? Sorry Trump couldn’t defeat her recently. God save us from Pro-Libertine Republicans. Is on Fox fairly often.
I take him at his word. He’s been straightforward and honorable about what he thinks.
IMO its rats and sinking ship time
With all the respect I have for Justice Thomas, he should stay away from this. Private relations between a husband and wife are no one’s business if there has not been a child concieved.
I know this seems like the political theater of the absurd. However, this is tricky to deal with. If the liberals and the media start hitting us over the head, with a perception that Republicans are against birth control, this can hurt politically.
Oh my god, she is pro-contraception. That is the last straw!
I don’t know much about Griswold, do you know where I could read up on it?
Good grief. Leave birth control alone.
They know baby killing is a losing issue, so they have to change the subject to something that is more palatable. The reaction to this nonsense is: Stop being ridiculous.
Tomas hates bad decisions. I can agree with him that legislation from the courtroom is not what the country signed off on.
If congress passed specific legislation on some of these issues it would probably have better treatment in a vote.
But if this enshrined gay marriage, I would not vote for it.
Well, at least they’re wasting time on this virtue signaling nonsense rather than a lot of other destructive things they could be doing to us.
Unfortunately, there are too many dupes on our side who jump right into any trap the Democrats set for us.
The federal government has no power under the constitution to decide this issue, it’s like “gay” marriage and abortion. Big government lovers will go bonkers over it.
This is an invasion of privacy.
Contraception is a problem now?
I understand folks not wanting to use it…but it’s a far cry from abortion.
I suspect his intent is to reverse and send it to the States to decide.
What is this? The lefts version of bread and circuses while everything goes to hell?
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.