And we're back!
Started by OttoVonBismarck, May 02, 2022, 08:02:53 PM
Quote from: The Brain on May 03, 2022, 06:17:07 AMThis is just step one. Step two is making allowing abortion unconstitutional.
QuoteBreakingBusinessRepublicans Will Try To Ban Abortion Nationwide If Supreme Court Overturns Roe V. Wade, Report RevealsUpdated May 2, 2022, 02:20pm EDTAlison DurkeeForbes StaffToplineThe fight over abortion restrictions could soon go from statehouses to Capitol Hill, as the Washington Post reports Republican lawmakers and anti-abortion rights activists are working to enact a federal abortion ban if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade this summer as expected and the GOP regains control of Congress.Key FactsRepublican senators have met to discuss legislation that would ban abortion nationwide, Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) told the Post, and Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) would reportedly likely introduce the bill.Anti-abortion groups like the Susan B. Anthony List are working to garner support for the legislation, and have met with Republican contenders for the 2024 presidential nomination about such a ban, including former President Donald Trump."Most of" the potential candidates support the ban and would make it a "centerpiece" of their campaign, Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser told the Post.A federal abortion ban could restrict the procedure as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, based on current proposals, with anti-abortion advocates believing a 15-week ban wouldn't go far enough.While many states are already taking steps to ban abortion—even before the Supreme Court rules—a federal law would stop those seeking abortions from being able to obtain one by traveling out of state, and overrule legislation in Democratic-led states that enshrines the right to the procedure.Crucial QuoteA coalition of anti-abortion groups led by Students for Life Action wrote to every GOP lawmaker in Congress Monday, calling this a "pivotal moment in which almost anything is possible" when it comes to abortion restrictions. "We ask you to join us in ensuring that the strongest measures possible are employed" to ban abortions, the letter reads.Chief Critic"By [Republicans] saying out loud that their goal is to push a nationwide abortion ban, it makes it clear that we have to elect more pro-reproductive health champions on the national level and in the states," Planned Parenthood Action Fund executive director Kelley Robinson told the Post, calling the federal proposal "terrifying."Big Number60%. That's the approximate share of Americans who oppose Roe v. Wade being overturned, according to multiple recent polls. Polling has consistently shown a majority of Americans support legal access to abortion, though higher shares are willing to back restrictions on the procedure later into a pregnancy.What To Watch ForWhether Republicans will get the chance to take action. The Supreme Court is now deliberating in a case on Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban, which will broadly consider whether states can restrict abortion. A ruling is expected by late June, when the court's term wraps up, though issuing decisions could stretch into early July. Justices signaled during oral arguments that they're likely to side with Mississippi, but it still remains unclear whether they'll narrowly uphold the 15-week ban or go further and overturn Roe v. Wade entirely. Republicans' fate will then depend on the midterm elections in November, where the GOP stands a chance to take back the House and Senate.What We Don't KnowWhether a federal abortion ban could actually be enacted, as even if Republicans gain control of Congress, they still face long odds. An abortion ban would need 60 votes to pass the Senate, which remains unlikely, as the Post notes even some GOP lawmakers could vote against the ban. Even if it passes, any legislation would likely be subject to legal challenges.Key BackgroundThe potential federal ban comes as Republican-led states have become increasingly emboldened to take action against abortion as the Supreme Court decision looms. States enacted more than 100 abortion restrictions in 2021 alone, according to the pro-abortion rights Guttmacher Institute, with another 33 so far enacted in 2022 as of April 15. Texas imposed the most severe restrictions in the U.S. since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973 when its six-week abortion ban took effect in September, which courts have so far allowed to stand. Idaho and Oklahoma have already followed Texas by passing similar bans of their own, in addition to a separate Oklahoma ban that makes performing an abortion a felony. Idaho's measure has been blocked in court, however, as has a law in Kentucky that effectively banned all abortions in the state.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."
Quote from: Valmy on May 03, 2022, 08:24:59 AMThat doesn't sound like a compromise...
Quote from: Berkut on May 03, 2022, 01:08:26 AMIs there any legal meaning behind justices exclaiming over and over that their reasoning is only applicable to some narrow interpretation?How does that even make any sense? If I say that all rectangles have four sides, therefore a square must be a rectangle, saying that you should not apply that same principle to a trapezoid doesn't make any sense.Roe was based on the recognized right to privacy. If you are arguing that Roe was bad law, then how can you argue that the recognition of a right to privacy is not ALSO bad law?
Quote from: The Larch on May 03, 2022, 05:42:58 AMIIRC, from the first comments on the draft that appeared last night, somebody commented that as part of the arguments in favour of limiting abortion was a proposal from one of the justices (Barrett, I think), about reforming adoption processes in order to establish "no questions asked" surrenders of newborns from mothers that wouldn't be able to properly take care of their babies, which also included "the increased demand for adoptions" as part of the rationale for restriction abortion.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 03, 2022, 08:58:13 AMQuote from: The Larch on May 03, 2022, 05:42:58 AMIIRC, from the first comments on the draft that appeared last night, somebody commented that as part of the arguments in favour of limiting abortion was a proposal from one of the justices (Barrett, I think), about reforming adoption processes in order to establish "no questions asked" surrenders of newborns from mothers that wouldn't be able to properly take care of their babies, which also included "the increased demand for adoptions" as part of the rationale for restriction abortion.Barrett raised the issue in oral argument.It testifies to the bubble of cosseted self-delusion in which these people live that adoption safe havens would be viewed as "solving" the problem.
Quote from: Zanza on May 03, 2022, 09:05:48 AMcoming from a mother of seven...
Quote from: Valmy on May 03, 2022, 08:09:38 AMHans always assured us that without Roe we would all song kumbaya and work out some delightful legislative compromise we could all live with. Well...here it is dude. I look forward to all the compromising and level headed legislating to come.
Quote from: Syt on May 03, 2022, 03:21:02 AMWhat rankles me, is that the same anti-abortionists cease their support as soon as the child is in the world. Can't afford support yourself and your kid? Shouldn't have gotten pregnant. Uninsured and have to pay the doctors etc. for the delivery? Shouldn't have gotten pregnant. Can't afford to take time off work after birth, and have no one to look after your kid? Shouldn't have gotten pregnant. Also, we'll make sure you have limited access to contraceptives. You slut.
Quote from: Valmy on May 03, 2022, 11:20:20 AMI have yet to see the US mellow on cultural issues. But we'll see.
Quote from: Barrister on May 03, 2022, 11:31:01 AMGay rights and gay marriage.
QuoteAnd it's only tangentially a "culture war" issue, but think about Obamacare, how vociferously it was fought, yet a decade later there's no serious moves to repeal or replace it anymore.
Page created in 0.034 seconds with 19 queries.