'The Strange Case Of Justice Alito'

[midcan5]

We have a SCOTUS full of perjurers today, I will be tactful and not mention Thomas and Kavanaugh's misdeeds. So then how did America get a court of fools. Partly it was Trump, elect a dishonest person and you get dishonest choices. But oddly Alito told the truth and they still confirmed him thinking of course that others had more compassion and dignity. Never assume is a golden rule.

"Prescient commentary on Justice Alito's 2006 confirmation hearings, arguing that Democrats did not press Alito nearly hard enough on matters of civil rights. "If he had revealed the opinions he actually holds about what rights the Constitution protects, he might well have been defeated". That said, Alito did tell Congress that he "expressly reserved the right to vote to overrule Roe v. Wade""

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/200...f-judge-alito/

"If confirmed to the D.C. Circuit, I would follow Roe v. Wade faithfully and fully. That would be binding precedent of the court. It's been decided by the Supreme Court." Brett Kavanaugh

[FindersKeepers]

We have a SCOTUS full of perjurers today, I will be tactful and not mention Thomas and Kavanaugh's misdeeds. So then how did America get a court of fools. Partly it was Trump, elect a dishonest person and you get dishonest choices. But oddly Alito told the truth and they still confirmed him thinking of course that others had more compassion and dignity. Never assume is a golden rule.

"Prescient commentary on Justice Alito's 2006 confirmation hearings, arguing that Democrats did not press Alito nearly hard enough on matters of civil rights. "If he had revealed the opinions he actually holds about what rights the Constitution protects, he might well have been defeated". That said, Alito did tell Congress that he "expressly reserved the right to vote to overrule Roe v. Wade""

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/200...f-judge-alito/

"If confirmed to the D.C. Circuit, I would follow Roe v. Wade faithfully and fully. That would be binding precedent of the court. It's been decided by the Supreme Court." Brett Kavanaugh

The problem with Roe was that it wasn't too constitutional to begin with, but you make a good point about the Justices who said they wouldn't overturn it and then did. Did they have a change of heart? Or, did they flat-out lie? Maybe a combination of both.

But, here's the deal. Americans will see women's reproductive rights codified. I have no doubt whatsoever about that. Right now, the pendulum is swinging strongly in the direction of the fringe religious right. It will swing back. It always does.

America (thankfully) is full of more good folks than loonie tunes. Although, we have our share of loonie tunes, to be sure.

[DGUtley]

The problem with Roe was that it wasn't too constitutional to begin with, but you make a good point about the Justices who said they wouldn't overturn it and then did. Did they have a change of heart? Or, did they flat-out lie? Maybe a combination of both.

But, here's the deal. Americans will see women's reproductive rights codified. I have no doubt whatsoever about that. Right now, the pendulum is swinging strongly in the direction of the fringe religious right. It will swing back. It always does.

America (thankfully) is full of more good folks than loonie tunes. Although, we have our share of loonie tunes, to be sure.

Too constitutional? It wasn't constitutional to begin with. There's no such thing as constitutional light. This 'they lied' argument is total bull$#@! - and posted here by an OP that has a morally casual attitude about the truth. I have been disappointed in some of the decisions, but if we stay within the dictates of the COTUS we'll be ok. Your fight is in the states. Have at it.

[FindersKeepers]

Too constitutional? It wasn't constitutional to begin with. There's no such thing as constitutional light. This 'this lied' argument is total bull$#@! - and posted here by an OP that has a morally casual attitude about the truth. I have been disappointed in some of the decisions, but if we stay within the dictates of the COTUS we'll be ok. Your fight is in the states. Have at it.

We will see women's reproductive rights codified at the national level.

We could soon see national protection for abortion pills.

[Peter1469]

The problem with Roe was that it wasn't too constitutional to begin with, but you make a good point about the Justices who said they wouldn't overturn it and then did. Did they have a change of heart? Or, did they flat-out lie? Maybe a combination of both.

But, here's the deal. Americans will see women's reproductive rights codified. I have no doubt whatsoever about that. Right now, the pendulum is swinging strongly in the direction of the fringe religious right. It will swing back. It always does.

America (thankfully) is full of more good folks than loonie tunes. Although, we have our share of loonie tunes, to be sure.

They didn't say they wouldn't overturn anything. They said they respected stare decisis. The majority opinion spends a great deal of time explaining the doctrine and how it works.

The OP is an idiot.

[DGUtley]

We will see women's reproductive rights codified at the national level. We could soon see national protection for abortion pills.

You will not see abortion codified at the national level. You may see national protection for abortifacient drugs.

[donttread]

We have a SCOTUS full of perjurers today, I will be tactful and not mention Thomas and Kavanaugh's misdeeds. So then how did America get a court of fools. Partly it was Trump, elect a dishonest person and you get dishonest choices. But oddly Alito told the truth and they still confirmed him thinking of course that others had more compassion and dignity. Never assume is a golden rule.

"Prescient commentary on Justice Alito's 2006 confirmation hearings, arguing that Democrats did not press Alito nearly hard enough on matters of civil rights. "If he had revealed the opinions he actually holds about what rights the Constitution protects, he might well have been defeated". That said, Alito did tell Congress that he "expressly reserved the right to vote to overrule Roe v. Wade""

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/200...f-judge-alito/

"If confirmed to the D.C. Circuit, I would follow Roe v. Wade faithfully and fully. That would be binding precedent of the court. It's been decided by the Supreme Court." Brett Kavanaugh

Or you could make a Constitutional argument for upholding Roe V Wade. But you didn't. That's because you know don't you? You know that there isn't one and that what the 73 court did was some God complex nullification
The word privacy isn't even in the 14th. What is there is a a statement that "no person shall be deprived of life, property or liberty without due process" Can you tell me how that translates to a Constitutional right to abortion? If 2020 proved anything it was that we do NOT have body autonomy.

I was shocked at the leak about the over turn and then I read and re read the 14th. There is no right to abortion there, or frankly anything resembling that in the 14th amendment. I am not anti-abortion within gestational limits. But the SC did not ban abortion, they simply corrected an unconstitutional massive federal over reach
The place for activism is at the state level. An amendment is out of the question because of the divisionism the two major gangs have fostered for decades

[Chris]

"If he had revealed the opinions he actually holds about what rights the Constitution protects, he might well have been defeated".

They're not supposed to comment on possible future cases as doing so might disqualify them.

Recall Jackson's evasiveness. Now some criticize her for that. But it's the same thing. Do not comment on possible future cases.


Ditto what Dave and Peter said.

[Chris]

You will not see abortion codified at the national level. You may see national protection for abortifacient drugs.

Why? It would be unconstitutional per Dobbs.

[FindersKeepers]

You will not see abortion codified at the national level. You may see national protection for abortifacient drugs.

I agree.

But, we will see a woman's right to make her own health choices codified. It may come in the form of a larger bill that protects all citizen's rights to choose their healthcare.