Posted on 05/03/2022 3:12:04 PM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
Supporters of Roe v. Wade are spreading fears that Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s draft decision overturning the landmark abortion case would mean that other Court precedents, including interracial marriage, could also be canceled.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Don’t worry; Twitter and FB fact checkers are on it.
On Constitutional grounds.
Does it involve murder ?
Few cases before the Supreme Court involve murder. But if there is no constitutional right to an abortion then how can there be a constitutional right to same sex marriage? Or birth control? Or interracial marriage?
...... Oh ..... And if you believe anything different .... You sall be sentenced to face a Firing Squad to be Birth Controled ...... Which again is a Womens sacred god given right .... Oops .... Sorry .... I did it again ..... I meant to say "Birthing Person."
Oh for God’s sake! 🙄
The 13th Amendment prevents that.
It is an effective approach. While most intelligent people know it would do no such thing, when your constituents are not real intelligent, you use this type of approach to keep ‘em in line.
As usual, they know that the truth will do them no good, so they make stuff up.
The 13th Amendment prevents that.
Not necessarily. Remember, we are dealing with people who don't need no stinkin' constitution.
Are there any pending lawsuits only of these other subjects?
The Supreme Court doesn’t just sit around issuing decrees. They hear cases based on cases brought up from the lower courts. In rare cases they hear a case directly, but those are rare, and still involve someone filing suit.
So unless someone has brought a case to overturn homosexual marriage or interracial marriage, there will be no overturning such previous court cases.
(just kidding, if you’re into interracial, that’s your business)
Breitbart article constructed around offhand tweets by Swallowwell and Sheboon Reid. Could have guessed.
It should. Simply because it's unconstitutional. Worthy legal and moral goals need to be argued and decided the correct, legal, and Constitutional way. Otherwise, we have no legal defense against tyranny and ghastly murder--as we saw in Roe, where abortion on demand as positive law was imposed on 50 states. We need to stop living in a Babylon bee-hive.
In other words, stare decisis is not absolute. If it is, they cannot argue that Roe vs Wade cannot be overturned and then argue that desegregation cases were correctly decided.
Of course, that is true if you want consistency in law. If you don't care, then.....
Overturning Roe will very likely lead to massive herds of Velociraptors roaming urban areas nationwide .
For real, I read it on the internet.
And gangs of Ukrainian and Swedish Nazis riding huge groups of motorcycles on our interstates .
ITS ALL TRUE.
“Clarence Thomas will be voting to end interracial marriage.”
Guess they never saw any pics of Ginni Thomas.
Well, there was Dred Scott, which technically some have argued was correct from the perspective of a strict interpretation of the Constitution.
But will there be massive herds of nazi Velociraptors riding huge groups of motorcycles on our interstates?
They’re all State Law issues.
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.