The Supreme Court upheld Roe v. Wade. How's that work for your conservative philosophy?
Actually, Roe v. Wade could conceivably be Treason, and not the whiny I don't like these guy's politics 'treason,' but the actual Constitutionally defined Treason.
First, let us reiterate what the Constitution defines as treason: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
Second, let us cite the Second and Tenth Amendments:
Amendment II.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment X.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Now, the second amendment makes mention of the militia, this is not defined anywhere in the Constitution, but the tenth amendment states that the people and the states retain all powers not delegated to the federal government; since the Constitution does not define the content of the militia then it is reasonably the states or the people that define the militia. And that supposition proves correct, my state constitution defines the state's militia as "all able-bodied male citizens between the ages of eighteen and forty-five, except such as are exempt by laws of the United States or of this state," and most states have similar definitions in their own Constitutions.
According to the data on National Right to Life [Org] there have been 28,511,400 abortions from `73 to `92 [making them of militia age]... however we need to 'exempt' the female portion of this number, we could use the ballpatk 50/50-split,m but empirically the rates here in the west are closer to 53/47 in favor of male so we will multiply by .53 truncating the result to an integer, this results in: 15,111,042.
Therefore, we can say that the militia has been deprived of more than 15 million persons DIRECTLY DUE to the US Supreme Court. How can a fifteen-million person deprivation of militia personnel be anything OTHER than an aid and comfort to the enemies of America? Hell, if any foreign power were to kill 15 million Americans there certainly SHOULD be war. Why should we sit back and let the Supreme Court do to us what we would refuse from a foreign power?
Don't look at me to be defending these mass-murdering bastards anytime soon, especially as the USSC has within its power to revisit and repudiate Roe v. Wade.
This is a silly response. Roe was wrong not because it came from the Supreme Court, rather it was wrong because the Court didn't follow the Constitution, Natural Law, Common Law or any other authority or precedent to come to the decision. It simply invented law whole-cloth.
In regards warrants, Justice Thomas looked back to the history and traditions of the American people, cited to the Constitution and provided sound justification for his decision.
You might not like it, but 4th Amendment cases are markedly different than "substantive due process cases" because the 4th Amendment itself contains the word "unreasonable". Who gets to define unreasonable? You? Why? The Constitution says: "The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court..." It doesn't say "Tigerseye".
"Substantive due process" doesn't exist in the Constitution. The word "unreasonable" in the 4th Amendment does.
Nice try at masking the issue, but you failed.