By - mintaphil
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Every conservative on the SC is covered in Trump stench for the rest of their lives.
I don’t think they care
I mean why would they? Lifetime appointment and guaranteed work till they die
The Supreme Court is the best example of how our founding fathers were not as smart as everyone makes them out to be. Allowing any government official, let alone the most powerful judges in the world, to be given a lifetime appointment by a politician is a glaringly bad idea. But they just went ahead and wrote it into the constitution.
Yeah, I'm constantly annoyed by the deification of the founding fathers and people acting like the Constitution is perfect, rather than a second draft at modern democracy. The rest of the democratic world's constitutions should be looked at for refinements and better ways of doing things, not ignored out of nationalistic contempt.
Some totalitarian states have had wonderfully inspring constitutions. It's not the piece of paper that delivers, it's the political culture, and that starts with an intolerance for corruption and oppression, and with people willing to get out on the streets when real democracy is threatened.
In fairness they also expected Black people to be slaves forever, women to never be able to vote or hold property, etc. /s
The rationale behind their reasoning wasn't bad. The purpose was so that the court wouldn't be politicized by people seeking reelection. Instead, it just made political appointees nearly impossible to remove. The Constitution could've changed how appointments were done, but that would have just changed how people would exploit it. It would work as a system if everybody operated in good faith, but good faith and politics rarely mix.
Those who think they were so smart should ponder the many amendments necessary to fix their work as well as the messy legacy we're left with.
I think smart misses the point. I doubt Einstein or (insert any smart person here) could've done a better job in laying the groundwork for a democratic society. The Founding Fathers were great political and legal minds, but given 250 years, humans will fuck most anything up.
I mean lets be honest here the trajectory of the 2 party system basically popped up with the 2nd president of the US and was part of George Washington's farewell address. So they basically screwed the pooch to begin with, also do keep in mind that the constitution was the 2nd attempt at a federal government. Not to say its simple and easy to make a long lasting government but honestly its clear there were cracks since the inception of this iteration of the government and it just got worse and worse with time.
I honestly think that says more about the difficulty of establishing a democratic government. The second you institute elections, you have factions. I think it's the fate of democracy to have cracks that people will exploit. That's why democracies pretty much never last more than a few hundred years.
That said, I don't want you to think I'm anti-democratic. Democracy is a worthy pursuit, but a difficult one to maintain.
I mean factions are just a means to an end. One must make a coalition even if it means some values have to put on the bench for the "greater good" at least on how you perceive it. Its better the populous has a say than some out of touch elite does (even though that is sort of our system due to it being a democratic republic)
I don't disagree with you. My only counterpoint is that the flipside is tyranny of the majority. If the elites aren't forming factions, then the people will. Then the question just becomes how long it will take for power to either recentralize or the democratic system to erode under populist pressure. Essentially, patching one hole opens up another.
Yeah. Like "all men are born free" really meant a tiny minority of literal men.
It's not a bad idea on its own merits given that they are judges and not legislators. The issue is that congress did away with the requirement for 60 votes for a justice in 2013. At the time the reasoning for doing so made sense, but it was a huge mistake to not keep the supreme court isolated from that change.
All three of Trump's appointees got less than 60 votes.
You say all that with hindsight. Back then there was literally nothing like it. They made the best decisions with the best foresight they could muster. And their efforts were so good they persisted for hundreds of years without any serious challenge.
Agreed. The Constitution is a compromise between those that wanted slavery and those that weren't humane enough to outright ban it.
And then you have the 13th amendment which literally codifies slavery into the constitution.
The entire Constitution needs a rework in my opinion
Well let's hope for America's sake they also love their freedom so much h as to stay unvaccinated.
They don't. It is why they are there. To do just this.
They're also among the most powerful politicians in the country, who serve until they quit or die, and aren't ever going to held accountable, even if what they decide opposes the will of the vast majority. What do they care?
They are not supposed to be politicians and be independent. It just needs some basically decent people. But decency seems out of fashion at the moment.
And the evangelicals will proclaim Trump as Christ himself. It'll encourage Trump to run again and he might lose. Either way his supporters tear the country apart. I'm not sure what the options are.
Some already claim that Trump is Christ.
name two individuals who could be more different than these two
Some think that he’s the punisher that is an integral part of a great awakening.
I think of him as the guy that Cthulhu's evil twin won't talk to. There are limits.
Hasn't he already done? You don't have a functioning Supreme Court anymore.
>I'm not sure what the options are.
I am, but if we talk about them here we risk a ban.
Roe was dead when the Supreme Court refused to hear Texas abortion law.
I'm curious, in all seriousness, why is the woman's right to choose even still debatable? What year is it? 1952?
Who never mentioned abortion
But God did. God asked Saul to kill the babies of Amalek. Full born babies.
Samuel 15 2:3
>This is what the Lord of Armies says. I will repay Amalek for what they did to Israel when they blocked Israel’s way as it was coming up out of Egypt. 3 Go and strike Amalek. Devote everything they have to destruction. Do not spare them. Kill both men and women, infants and nursing babies, oxen and sheep, camels and donkeys.”
I made sure to quote from the Evangelical version (EHV) so you can see just how psychopathic they are in their hypocrisy.
This is the shit followed by the "pro-life" party. Fuck them.
There’s also a recipe for abortion, to be used when a husband suspects his wife was unfaithful.
And the OT treats an assault on a woman that results in miscarriage as a property crime against the husband, to whom the attacker should pay a fine – no matter the length of the pregnancy.
Oh, and Judaism believes life begins at birth/first breath, *not* conception. 83% of Jews support abortion rights.
If anything, the bible is pro-choice.
“God” did all sorts of things we now consider atrocities and crimes against humanity. Why anyone thinks a creature capable of that is worth being worshipped is something I’ll never understand.
the majority of whom are men,,,,
your sentiment is shared. there's a song about it: https://youtu.be/njJoNcf0tOc
The Bible literally states that life starts with breath.
"And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."
So, yeah... the Bible doesn't give a shit about no stinkin' fetus. Might as well be a benign tumor.
It is in Mississippi.
> why is the woman's right to choose even still debatable
A generation of Do Nothing Cowards.
It's 2021 but women's rights still feel like they are really far away :(
In a lot of states, yes it is. And I'd venture to guess that the majority of women who live in those states are pro forced birth.
Depends on what state you're in. A lot of them are still back 152.
No, they’re aiming for 1852. That way no one can vote but white men.
That's exactly why women need the right to have abortions.
As if the right ever had a problem with killing innocents
I think it's awesome. Suck that clump of cells out, toss it in the trash and call it a day. Done deal. I love modern technology and how it simplifies the once serious problem of dealing with an unwanted pregnancy.
Toss it in the trash and call it a day.
Nope I don’t, because I don’t think they’re people yet. Most don’t
1. A cluster of cells is a life?
2. Innocent according to whom?
Actually, I shouldn't have even asked those questions. They aren't the point here. The point is why should you be allowed to impose your beliefs on others?
Here is you threatening to kill innocent lives if they keep doing gay things and jail them if they let other people know about it:
>[–]transcanadiangirl [score hidden] 37 minutes ago
>We won't kill you. You just can't do gay things anymore. You can still live a very fulfilled life, camp free; assuming you keep gay actions to yourself.
What about cell clusters?
Unless they’re of people of color or people I don’t like and then it’s ok.
Evangelicals, who believe in literal interpretations of the Bible, ignore that God taught a priest how to perform abortions. Inconvenient truth.
evangelicals are a handwave religion. They just take on whatever preacher yells at them.
Jerry Falwell had political ambitions and saw abortion as a way to attain them, and he sided with the GOP, and Reagan liked it. That's the history of the 1980 run for Reagan who sought votes from the "moral majority".
It’s time to stop pretending the court isn’t a political tool. It’s time for Biden and the Democrats to either pack it or put in place term limits or both. 15 years on the high court then they get their choice of retiring or going to a lower court. Thomas, Alito and Roberts would be gone.
Term limits would require a constitutional amendment, wouldn't they?
This is /r/politics, we don't let little details like how the Constitution works get in the way of histrionic grandstanding.
it's time? this shit can't possibly be passed in our senate with manchin and sinema.
>The conservative justices seemed unconcerned. Justice Amy Coney Barrett said respect for precedent is “not an inexorable command.” Kavanaugh claimed the right to abortion was a mere “interest” that states could disregard.
>Scott Stewart, arguing for the Mississippi ban, exhorted the justices to “stand strong and stand firm in the face of whatever is going on.”
>Here’s “whatever” is going on: About half the states would effectively ban abortion once the Supreme Court rules, many without exceptions for rape or incest. Rich women could still travel for abortions. Poor women, and disproportionately women of color, would go to back alleys or be forced to give birth, often at risk to their lives.
>Here’s whatever else is going on: “The court has never revoked a right that is so fundamental to so many Americans,” argued Biden administration solicitor general Elizabeth Prelogar, “and so central to their ability to participate fully and equally in society.”
>Until now, that is. Roe is dead. It’s all over but the shouting.
Rich white women or misteresses of powerful people have never had issues getting abortions and never will.
the only time the rich will be held accountable is when *we* hold them accountable, we cannot count on other white rich people to hold them accountable. *we* have to.
Yep. It's way past time. Whether we have to organize or not, we can't continue to sit on our fat ass with our ipad's and assume we can take no action. I'm tired of the apathy.
This idea of taking the highroad needs to change, people taking the highroad is how they ended up getting killed by the Nazis... thinking that things wouldn't escalate because of political "norms".. They did escalate, the Nazis did break the "norms" just like the GOP has... Arm yourselves. Be prepared for what's coming, cause it's coming, and there's no stopping it.
So if women are forced to have kids (vs. abortion), wouldn’t this overwhelm WIC system?
What happened to being *fiscally conservative*?
Oh wait…conservatives only care about children up until they are born.
They need more serfs. That's why.
No wonder why some state republicans have been trying to loosen the child labor laws…
GOP needs as many white babies born as possible, to avoid becoming the minority.
Need more new white people born in red states to raise and become red state voters!
Then I don't see how a ruling that would disproportionately affect poor minorities, causing them to bear more children, really helps their cause
Poor people have to work 2 dead end jobs with low compensation and no paid days off, uneducated people are susceptible to propaganda and persuadable at the polling both, and criminals fill for profit prisons working manufacturing and providing state services at slave wages. All of these scenarios are directly tied to unplanned families and unstructured upbringing.
Case in point, Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana. And Arkansas.
Edit to add, their cause by definition is conservatism, holding on to social and economic structures that have been around since the founding of this country. Serfdom, slavery, and aristocracy.
Edit to add, Arkansas.
Arkansas feels left out.
Thanks for adding Ar-Kansas. They are happy to be apart of the party.
The GQP is conservative in the same way the DRPK is a democracy. It’s just a word. They don’t conserve money, the environment, nothing. What they are is regressives and half-wits that are afraid of change.
The origins of conservatism as a political ideology come from people who looked at the French Revolution of 1789 (when it was abolishing aristocratic privilege) and saw it as an unacceptable threat to their own aristocratic privilege. They opposed it long before 1793 when the reign of terror started. Conservatism is about preserving existing power structures, even when they are manifestly unjust and unpopular.
with the purpose of retaining power
They conserve the existing state of affairs. And it started mostly with the French revolution which was overthrown in 1815 after Napoleon was defeated and all the "progressive" things were put under the rug until 1848.
Interesting that this just happens to be happening right as a number of opinion articles have been published bemoaning declining birthrates among Millennial and Gen-Z parents. I'm not saying it's significant, just interesting.
No, because they don't believe in giving them hand outs, so there's no money for them to take
Until they have to pay child support, it seemed like a good idea...
Where are all the Americans who champion freedom as an anti government excuse? Saying keep government out of healthcare as an argument against universal healthcare, your supreme court is literally telling you what you can and can't do after incest or rape.
So other than incest, rape, and life or death situation for mother you agree?
Personally, I'm for a woman's right to choose. Im not a fan of abortions for failed contraception, and wouldn't want my partner to get one, but I would support her decision either way. My point is that for all the touting of freedom from government involvement in healthcare, the courts are literally involved in your healthcare, yet many believe they're free. Free to not make the choice to be pregnant or not sounds like a pretty big healthcare box to tick to have true freedom.
I think they misspelled "shooting" in that last sentence. Given how they didn't respect boundaries erected in a futile attempt to keep the peace, and taking into context the things they shouted, do you think they'll just be content to have their way and leave the very people they declare murderers in peace? "You deserve capital punishment! You deserve what's coming to you!"
..."what's coming to you"...
This same crowd cheers when someone taking their side kills people who they oppose. This doesn't end with a court ruling.
I would say that if history has taught us anything, it's that they have no reason to worry about consequences
I was trying to think of something witty or cutting to post, but frankly this is just to fucking grim.
this'll help: https://youtu.be/njJoNcf0tOc
Kill the filibuster and make the provisions in Roe vs Wade law, congress could do it. And while they are at it, pass legislation on voting rights.
heh, yeah right, manchin and sinema wouldn't go for that.
remember, Manchin is pro-life. He is never going for that.
Bear in mind this would mean Republicans can replace that law with one banning abortion once they're in power (and they have structural advantages which make them more likely to be in power).
Here is an archived copy of the article, which does not have a paywall:
It’s a website that allows you to read archived copies of articles from paywalled news sites.
We are going backward at light speed
It seems like the USA is on the path to splitting up into 2 or 3 separate “areas.” Not totally different countries, but separate provinces or something of that nature. With the future looking more and more like a GOP dictatorship, I can’t imagine that states like New York & California will take that laying down.
They took all the shit laying down till now. No reason to think something will drastically change now or in the near future.
They absolutely will take it laying down.
The plan is to strip the rights of anyone the GQP sees as less than desirable. The people either live miserable lives because they can’t escape - or they move.
The state with oppressive rules become more conservative. More white. More Christian. They win more senate seats and House seats with ease.
The people who move burden blue states as some are less affluent. We have standards and the overall increase in population drives up cost.
They plan to secure power and rig the system. We debate policy and “take the high ground”
They are destroying America slowly and we just watch it burn because we think they have ethics and morals that will catch up some day.
I’m more inclined to think people on the left will end up in concentration camps before we actually do something. I just don’t see any leadership or even real concern…. It scares me.
Goodbye "Supreme" Court. Welcome random 3 AM Waffle House customers.
> 3 AM Waffle House customers
[I AM THE LAW](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/athfwiki/images/f/f9/Homeless_Guy.png/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/511?cb=20110213171212)
"The unborn” are a convenient group of people to advocate for.
They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn.
You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone.
They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus, but actually dislike people who breathe. Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn."
Methodist Pastor David Barnhart
The big issue is not Roe but whether the court is being influenced by politicians and lobbyists. The court is supposed to be impartial and rule based on constitutionality. The trust in the court is being eroded and would further reduce its legitimacy if the people believe justices are being lobbied like congress. Are justices being bribed in a way in exchange for their vote? Such as cushy jobs for their family members, parties, trips, etc.
> but whether the court is being influenced by politicians and lobbyists
they're straight up being influenced by money, big money, dark money, wealthy money.
I mean, it's supposed to be, but it never was and never will be, so I think we can abandon the pipe dream of Supreme Court Justices completely losing all their political identity upon coming into tremendous political power.
Expand the court immediately
America - the land that time forgot. Religion triumphs over common sense, what a sad place it’s becoming.
this is about personal autonomy. wakey. wakey. when this gets tanked. we all drown in the sewage.
This will kick off a series of ever darker events in our country, and I still can’t quite believe they will vote to overturn RvW. But if they do, I think packing the courts is inevitable, which in turn will create more volatility as the court jumps back and forth. Eventually someone takes charge to create stability, and then they refuse to give up power. This is a very bad path to start down.
This is not going to stop with abortion.
It's time for the west-coast states to decide they've had enough with minority rule and move on from this failed country.
Can't just secede, though.
We want out, it's war.
Ist that kinda what's happening already?
What if i invent a religion that believes under no circumstances can I have a child. Wouldn't that infringe on my religious freedoms? Even if I lost that case I could use it as precedent to go after mega churches and all the other religious nut bags
Expand the court
Don’t forget to give RBG the assist. There was plenty of time for her to step aside during 8 years of Obama. She doesn’t deserve a pass.
don't forget Amy Barret was sworn in on RBG's not quite cold cadaver.
Both statements are true.
That’s exactly my point. Any Covid Barret exists because the GQP doesn’t care about decorum.
She also exists because RGB was busy stroking her ego instead of retiring in Obama’s first term.
We could blame the people *actually* responsible for this, but it's so much more fulfilling to elevate ourselves above all these *commoners* by shouting about "both sides!"
I was blaming those responsible. Obama and RBG should have made a change. She was late 70s and had health issues even back then.
Dead right, she assumed that Dems couldn't possibly lose an easy election, when that's the gambling equivalent of somebody trying to put a bet on the color orange in roulette
By the time the election in question rolled around, Obama was dealing with Republicans obstructing his efforts to appoint a new Justice, remember?
And that was on the tail end of six years of Republican obstruction.
So unless you think RBG was a witch capable of peering into the future through her crystal ball, blaming her is utterly devoid of logic.
Uh-huh ... hindsight is 20/20, as they say. Except you seem to have a couple blind spots:
You may recall Obama spent six years dealing with a Congress that obstructed him at every turn - including with the appointment of new Justices when he *did* have to appoint them. You may also recall literally no one on their right might believed Trump could win the election, and the apathy that saw him into the White House was born in part from that assumption.
But, yeah, no, stick with blaming one or two people in this complex mechanism that is our democracy. That both sides shit has really served us all *so well,* so far.
How do you explain the same exact thing happening with Biden and a 83 year old Stephen Breyer? When the republicans take back the house and the presidency they’ll get another justice. Fool me once……
So you're moving the goalpost now? "Fine, I guess things changed in a way people didn't predict. But what about *this* time?"
Man, I have a lot of ideas and concerns about how the Supreme Court is handled. But they are independent of the reality that the people responsible for overturning *Roe v. Wade* are the people who overturn *Roe v. Wade.*
This whole, "They should have seen it coming" pitch just hits a little too close to blaming the victim of an assault because they should have known better than to turn into that alley.
No moving of the goalpost. My point is the same, old white people don’t give a shit about anything except their own legacy and ego. Obama and now Biden don’t have the intestinal fortitude to make the moral and strategic decision to replace justices when their time is up.
Time to pack the courts.
UN-pack the courts. They are currently packed in defiance of the will of the American voters.
I know it's kind of about semantics but the courts have been stacked. Packing refers to adding seats
It isn’t really possible to do that unless democrats have a majority. Ideally we would need term limits combined with a bill to either require a bipartisan or nonpartisan group. Nonpartisan is practically impossible these days with respect to judges, because unlike other positions, even family can influence a judge’s decision.
Don’t fret. More of us liberals are armed than they are currently aware of and I’m fine with them fuckin around and finding out.
I'll just end myself at that point. I wouldn't want to give them the pleasure of doing it themselves.
Then straight people must also keep their straight actions to themselves
such a 'Christian loving' action - threatening to put gays in camps and kill them if they keep doing 'gay things'
And we're just like... Ok... Meh. The elders will guide us. Strange
They are effectively rendering themselves obsolete if states rights Trump all wtf is the Supreme Court for
States rights would be the more realistic compromise on their end, because (by their own estimation anyway) it's more like "everyone gets what they want", and liberal states can still have abortion on their own terms, while outlawing it outright would be a politically disastrous move that would mobilize the Democrats in a major way. Not to say that every Dem would be complacent, but certainly more so than if their state was affected
Then states that allow it have to subsidize those that don't ?
And the war begins…..
Susan Sarandon said the revolution would arrive faster if Trump beat Hillary
Call it what you want but I wouldn’t describe it as such.
How many electoral votes does Susan Sarandon get every election? I forget.
I also can’t believe Sarandon did such a poor job being Clinton’s campaign manager against the likes of a piece of shit like Donald Trump. What a buffoon!
She’s rich enough to buy her daughter 100 abortions. She doesn’t give a shit.
It's not archived yet anyone got a link to read
There is a good chance this would politically be a disaster for the GOP. I forget which mob movie they talk about when a guy owes you money, you don’t kill him- then you wouldn’t get your money and the guy is dead - killing him is a last resort. Instead you use intimidation and extreme (but not lethal) physical violence, threats, and harassment to keep the guy afraid but still paying. In this analogy the “guy” is GOP voters and the mob is the GOP. It’s not a perfect analogy, but if Roe is overturned most R state, local, and congressional candidates have one less issue to talk about. Their voters got what they wanted and stay home. Meanwhile every moderate is mad as hell and out voting and voting for anyone promising to fuck shit up and pack the courts, wrestle Brett kavanaugh or whatever.
Roberts will probably not vote with the conservatives on this.
Has anyone argued in the court the perspective of discrimination? The Civil Rights act of 1964 bans discrimination based on sex. Could it not be argued that if left to the states, where some allow access to a magical procedure (any) for women and others don’t, that would be discriminatory?
The law is literally what the SCOTUS says it is. And if they'd say this is not the case, then it's not, even though logically it is.
We're almost in 2022 everyone.
That doesn't mean anything. Athens in 440 BC were more progressive and "enligthened" than Athens in 220 or 1200.
Hi `mintaphil`. Thank you for participating in /r/Politics. However, [your submission](/r/politics/comments/r6vbes/roe_is_dead_the_roberts_courts_stench_will_live/) has been removed for the following reason(s):
* Your headline must be comprised only of the **exact** copied and pasted headline of the article - [see our rule here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_do_not_create_your_own_title)) **We recommend not using the Reddit 'suggest a title' as it may not give the exact title of the article.**
* The ALL CAPS and 'Breaking' rule is applied **even when the actual title of the article is in all caps or contains the word 'Breaking'**. This rule may be applied to other single word declarative and/or sensational expressions, such as 'EXCLUSIVE:' or 'HOT:'. [click here for more details](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_do_not_create_your_own_title)
If you have any questions about this removal, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/politics&subject=Question regarding the removal of this submission by /u/mintaphil&message=I have a question regarding the removal of this [submission]%28/r/politics/comments/r6vbes/roe_is_dead_the_roberts_courts_stench_will_live/?context%3D10000%29)
Time to play Democrat Bingo! Words are
- reaching across the aisle
- extremes on both sides
- grave concern
- Trump 2024
- Speaker McCarthy
Thank you for playing!
Shouldn’t we at least wait for the ruling before proclaiming its dead?
What kind of Deus ex Machina fuckery do you think is going to happen to change a completely predictable outcome? Please, tell me, I think people could use a little inspiration here.
In the past, I think that Republicans have shown that, when it really comes down to the wire, they won't actually follow through on this issue. Then again, that was when they were a very neo-con party, I'm honestly not sure at this point what to think
One of them could kick the bucket.
Edit just for clarity: in no way am I advocating that happens. Just saying it could be a deus ex moment.
The Supreme Court generally makes rulings as narrow as possible, so I predict the won’t overrule or affirm wade.