Posted on 11/29/2021 9:43:33 PM PST by SeekAndFind
The U.S. Supreme Court announced that it will take up arguably one of the most abortion cases in at least three decades.
The nation’s highest court will hear a direct challenge out of Mississippi to Roe v. Wade’s landmark holding that the Constitution provides a right of access to abortion.
“It’s the case opponents of abortion have long sought and advocates of abortion rights have dreaded, coming before a strongly conservative lineup of justices. Three were appointed by then-President Donald Trump, who said he would choose nominees willing to overturn Roe,” NBC News reported.
“The issue of whether the Constitution provides a right to seek an abortion is not before the court in the Texas challenges, but it is squarely presented in Wednesday’s case. At the heart of it is a Mississippi law — passed in 2018 but blocked by the lower courts — that would ban most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, allowing them only in medical emergencies or cases of severe fetal abnormality. Supporters say the law is intended to regulate ‘inhumane procedures’ and argue that a fetus is capable of detecting and responding to pain by that point,” the report added.
NBC news says?
Honestly they are screaming about very little.
There will still be states permitting it. They know this. There will still be left challenges to it.
Women just do not want to give up the power to play God with someone elses’ life. Too many women want to play God and too many cuck men are fine with it, for a number of different reasons.
interesting . . .
Why would be freaking out? Thomas and Alito can’t overturn Roe themselves. Maybe there’s a slight chance Roberts or Barrett could. That’s still only four.
RE: NBC news says?
SOURCE:
https://conservativebrief.com/challenge-55452/?utm_source=CB&utm_medium=PP
NBC News reported:
The case presents an attack on the court’s landmark Roe v. Wade ruling in 1973 and a follow-on decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey about two decades later. The court held that a state can impose some restrictions on abortion provided they do not present an “undue burden,” but cannot ban the procedure before fetal viability, generally considered to be 23 to 24 weeks into the pregnancy.
Mississippi said it must be free to take account of advancements in medical knowledge that would shift the point of viability earlier in the pregnancy. But abortion-rights advocates said viability, defined as the time at which a life could be sustained outside the womb, has remained the same since Roe was decided.
In its submissions, Mississippi said the Supreme Court made a fundamental error in its landmark abortion rulings, arguing, “Nothing in constitutional text, structure, history, or tradition supports a right to abortion.” The state also said the court was wrong to rule that state laws outlawing abortion violated a woman’s right to privacy. “Nowhere else in the law does a right of privacy or a right to make personal decisions provide
RE: Maybe there’s a slight chance Roberts or Barrett could. That’s still only four.
You don’t think Gorsuch and Kavanaugh will do the right thing?
What are those Dems so nervous about?
We are talking about Chief Justice Johnny Robert’s Supreme Court. He sides with the most liberal judges at least 70% of the time. The two ‘disappointments’ aka Kavanaugh and Barrett
will follow his lead, as usual.
“Why would be freaking out? Thomas and Alito can’t overturn Roe themselves. Maybe there’s a slight chance Roberts or Barrett could. That’s still only four.”
Forget Roberts. He is pretty much on record for upholding Roe in the Louisiana case in 2020.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-strikes-down-restrictive-louisiana-abortion-law-n1231392
Unless Roberts reverses himself, striking Roe will require Kav, Barrett and Gorsuch. The only one I have some degree of confidence in is Gorsuch who has shown himself willing to gut precedent if he thinks it was wrongly decided. Kav and Barrett are weak, nervous establishment types who want to be liked by the elites. As such, I’m not optimistic but I’d love to be proven wrong about them.
Thanks.
Bated breath time.
The Supreme Court would be very unlikely to do anything that would upset (royally piss off) a large chunk of society. Like you suggest, if anything, they’ll uphold Roe.
And for the record, any kind of abortion restrictions will be a boon for Democrat fundraising. Even a twice as senile old Biden could win a presidential race against any R candidate threatening Roe.
Infanticide is just soooooo wonderful. I do declare, why who could possibly be against that?
If someone inconveniences my family or worse commits a crime against my family, I want the right to chose a innocent person to put to death for my conscious. I chose ***.
I don’t get the angst. Infanticide will remain legal in the US until about a month after the last “clinic” closes for lack of business. It’s too profitable. The “clinics” profit, the pro abort lobby profits, the anti-abort lobby profits, and the politicians have another issue they can trot out as a periodic distraction. When so many profit from the status quo, its unlikely that it will change. Possible, but unlikely.
Well, the public is pretty ignorant on the Roe issue. Polls have shown that most people (wrongly) think that overturning Roe will make abortion illegal. It won’t. It will simply mean that some red states with large anti-abortion populations will proscribe the practice. In the blue states, nothing will change. If Roe were overturned (and, again, I’m not optimistic that it will be), I don’t think that the pro-Dem, pro-Biden aftershock will materialize in the way that you predict. Once pro-abort people in blue states understand that abortion will be unaffected in their state, I think that the overall reaction will be muted. I don’t think that Alabama or Oklahoma or Louisiana or Mississippi suddenly swing to the Dems if abortions are banned in those states.
If on the very off chance Roe vs Kids is overturned, then I think you’re probably correct. Not so big of a deal beyond the initial drama and the push towards cultural separation speeds up a bit.
One of the most what? Who writes this crap? Did they leave out a word? “One of the most abortion cases…”?
“The only one I have some degree of confidence in is Gorsuch”
But didn’t he write the Roe vs. Wade for gender theory, elevating gender confusion to a protected civil rights classification? I don’t think he’s a slam dunk against abortion. Kav and Barrett are iffy and Roberts is probably gone.
...
Gorsuch and Kavanaugh already stated during their confirmation hearings that they considered Roe to be "settled law", an "important precedent" and wouldn't vote to overturn it.
I suppose there's a VERY slim chance they were simply lying and telling the RAT Senators what they wanted to hear (as FReepers argued at the time trying to defend Trump's crappy picks) but so far their records on the court demonstrate that they are NOT "pro-life justices in the Scalia mold"
I'd give about a 5-10% chance either of them would "evolve" on the court in a GOOD way and go to bat for us on this one.
Odds that Barrett votes the right way, I'd say 60-70% at this point (she seems to be sincerely pro-life at the time of her confirmation, AND had gone on record in the past publicly saying that Roe should be overturned, but has pretty much been a weak and useless justice thus far).
Roberts, I'd say 45-55% chance he does the right thing here. Similar to above, seemed to sincerely pro-life at the time of his confirmation hearings. His record since then has been increasingly backstabbing and there's no telling WHAT he'd do on this one.
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.