Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

[CountDeMoney]

HE TOLD YOU WHAT HE WAS GOING TO DO. HE DID WHAT HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO DO.

To think that senators that have a career reputation of playing both sides of the aisle are actually shocked, shocked that this could happen falls in the same bag of bullshitters that told the left for years that there was nothing to worry about with Roe v Wade, they'd never overturn it, you're just being hysterical.

Trump: I'll appoint Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe v. Wade abortion case
Published Wed, Oct 19 2016

Donald Trump said the overturning of the landmark Supreme Court decision giving women the right to abortion "will happen, automatically," if he is elected president and gets to appoint justices to the high court.

"I am pro-life," Trump said during Wednesday night's presidential debate when asked whether he wanted that decision, Roe v. Wade, reversed by the Supreme Court.

Trump said that if the ruling were to be reversed, laws on the legality or illegality of abortion would "go back to the individual states" to decide, which was the case prior to Roe v. Wade.

But when moderator Chris Wallace pressed him on whether he wanted the ruling overturned, Trump said, "That will happen, automatically in my opinion," because he would get to nominate potentially several justices to the court.

In response, Hillary Clinton said, "I strongly support Roe v. Wade."

"I will defend Roe v. Wade, I will defend a woman's right to make her own decision," Clinton said.

She criticized Trump for having said in the past that a woman should be punished if she got an abortion when it was made illegal.

Trump fired back, saying Clinton was in favor of partial-birth abortions being legal, which meant that a fetus could be "ripped out" of a mother's womb a day before she was due to give birth.

[Oexmelin]

Either they are truly shocked, in which case, they exhibit a level of political stupidity that warrants their being primaried out, or they feign shock, in which case theirs is a cynical gamble to either cover their inaction, and turn this sort of thing almost exclusively into a funding opportunity.

[The Minsky Moment]

How is it that no-one here is really surprised that Kavanaugh voted to overturn Roe

I was surprised to learn Kavanaugh made that statement in the meeting.  It may have not been under oath but it crosses a line in my book.  he should not get a pass because of Susan Collins being naive.

[crazy canuck]

How is it that no-one here is really surprised that Kavanaugh voted to overturn Roe

I was surprised to learn Kavanaugh made that statement in the meeting.  It may have not been under oath but it crosses a line in my book.  he should not get a pass because of Susan Collins being naive.

Agreed.  Waving it away as inconsequential reduces his culpability.

[crazy canuck]

HE TOLD YOU WHAT HE WAS GOING TO DO. HE DID WHAT HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO DO.

To think that senators that have a career reputation of playing both sides of the aisle are actually shocked, shocked that this could happen falls in the same bag of bullshitters that told the left for years that there was nothing to worry about with Roe v Wade, they'd never overturn it, you're just being hysterical.

Trump: I'll appoint Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe v. Wade abortion case
Published Wed, Oct 19 2016

Donald Trump said the overturning of the landmark Supreme Court decision giving women the right to abortion "will happen, automatically," if he is elected president and gets to appoint justices to the high court.

"I am pro-life," Trump said during Wednesday night's presidential debate when asked whether he wanted that decision, Roe v. Wade, reversed by the Supreme Court.

Trump said that if the ruling were to be reversed, laws on the legality or illegality of abortion would "go back to the individual states" to decide, which was the case prior to Roe v. Wade.

But when moderator Chris Wallace pressed him on whether he wanted the ruling overturned, Trump said, "That will happen, automatically in my opinion," because he would get to nominate potentially several justices to the court.

In response, Hillary Clinton said, "I strongly support Roe v. Wade."

"I will defend Roe v. Wade, I will defend a woman's right to make her own decision," Clinton said.

She criticized Trump for having said in the past that a woman should be punished if she got an abortion when it was made illegal.

Trump fired back, saying Clinton was in favor of partial-birth abortions being legal, which meant that a fetus could be "ripped out" of a mother's womb a day before she was due to give birth.

He also said he would make Mexico pay for the wall, and a long list of other things he never actually did.  Why people are taking Trump's claim seriously now is a lot of hindsight.

Those who are knowingly saying they saw all of this coming with clear prescience may be forgetting the shock everyone had when the draft was leaked.  And the thought that it was leaked to pressure the other conservative appointments on court. 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

[CountDeMoney]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Eat me.

[Sheilbh]

It just seems to me that complaining about him misleading Susan Collins is a bit like focusing on the leak as the real outrage - rather than the judgement itself.

It is the product of a legal movement and set of institutions that have had overturning Roe as their number 1 priority at least since Casey in the early 90s when Souter, O'Connor and Kennedy disappointed (but still significantly narrowed Roe). It was the stated goal of the man who appointed these justices and clearly a huge priority for McConnell running the Senate given how he handled Obama nominations. And the big argument for supporting Trump was "but Gorsuch" - they were literally saying "hold your nose because of the judges he'll appoint". It's another example but when it comes to the GOP in recent - the alarmists have been pretty consistently right. It seems the trick was listening to what Republicans say they want to do and believing them.

For what it's worth Clarence Thomas also testified that he didn't have a personal opinion on Roe, I'm not sure that's true either. But I think it leads you to the wrong conclusion if the focus is on Kavanaugh (or any other justice) misleading senators, rather than the wider party, the Federalist Society, movement conservatism and its focus on overturning Roe - because I think that explains how this happened more. I think it's more that there's been a strategy to win the court - and they've had some luck on their way - rather than badly behaved individuals (and I very much suspect they're coached on how to get through nomination).

[DGuller]

The lucky run Republicans had with the court is really tilting.  So many close calls that often went their way.  GWB and Trump became presidents by very narrow margins with justified questions over their legitimacy, but ultimately that doesn't matter, only the judges appointed by them do.  Both Scalia and Ginsburg also died at a time that enabled McConnel's cynical plays.  Those butterfly ballots in Florida in 2000 really did lead to so many butterfly effects.

[The Minsky Moment]

It's true that it is secondary and it is true that it wasn't the cause of what happened.  But it's all part of a piece.  Because overturning Roe was a MISSION FROM GOD a la the Blues Brothers, it justified Blues Brothers like destruction - lying, cheating and undermining the integrity of the republic to get to the end.  Lying to senators to secure appointments isn't the main story but it is part of the story.

[The Minsky Moment]

The lucky run Republicans had with the court is really tilting.  So many close calls that often went their way.

Luck favors the ruthless.  And they weren't quite as lucky as you indicate.  Souter and O'Connor did not pan out as expected and that set back the program.  Had the two of them and Kennedy followed the program this would have played out in the 90s.

[alfred russel]

How is it that no-one here is really surprised that Kavanaugh voted to overturn Roe

I was surprised to learn Kavanaugh made that statement in the meeting.  It may have not been under oath but it crosses a line in my book.  he should not get a pass because of Susan Collins being naive.

Susan Collins isn't naive. She is an extremely skilled politician that won reelection by 9 points in a state her party lost the presidency by 9 points in the same fucking cycle.

She voted for Kavenaugh and Gorsuch when she was looking at a possible republican primary challenge, and against Barrett after getting the nomination and facing a general election. In an era of extreme partisanship she is a very rare politician that survives in enemy territory.

[CountDeMoney]

(and I very much suspect they're coached on how to get through nomination).

All political nominees that appear before the Senate are coached for the process.

[DGuller]

The lucky run Republicans had with the court is really tilting.  So many close calls that often went their way.

Luck favors the ruthless.  And they weren't quite as lucky as you indicate.  Souter and O'Connor did not pan out as expected and that set back the program.  Had the two of them and Kennedy followed the program this would have played out in the 90s.

The dud justices were not bad luck, they were just part of the learning curve.  Eventually the Federalist Society figured out a way to vet their candidates to make sure that double agents or other unreliable elements don't make it through the screening.

[crazy canuck]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Eat me.

Hey, if you want to start saying Trump is a genius, fill your boots.

[crazy canuck]

It just seems to me that complaining about him misleading Susan Collins is a bit like focusing on the leak as the real outrage - rather than the judgement itself.

It is the product of a legal movement and set of institutions that have had overturning Roe as their number 1 priority at least since Casey in the early 90s when Souter, O'Connor and Kennedy disappointed (but still significantly narrowed Roe). It was the stated goal of the man who appointed these justices and clearly a huge priority for McConnell running the Senate given how he handled Obama nominations. And the big argument for supporting Trump was "but Gorsuch" - they were literally saying "hold your nose because of the judges he'll appoint". It's another example but when it comes to the GOP in recent - the alarmists have been pretty consistently right. It seems the trick was listening to what Republicans say they want to do and believing them.

For what it's worth Clarence Thomas also testified that he didn't have a personal opinion on Roe, I'm not sure that's true either. But I think it leads you to the wrong conclusion if the focus is on Kavanaugh (or any other justice) misleading senators, rather than the wider party, the Federalist Society, movement conservatism and its focus on overturning Roe - because I think that explains how this happened more. I think it's more that there's been a strategy to win the court - and they've had some luck on their way - rather than badly behaved individuals (and I very much suspect they're coached on how to get through nomination).

I don't think anyone is focusing on the lie.  But it was a lie and that continues to be important.