Another fun fact, the Supreme Court isn't, unlike every other court, bound by any set of ethics rules, meaning that you cannot force recusal, it is left to the discretion of the individual judges.
Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade; states can ban abortion
- Thread starter Piscian
- Start date
You've got the onus the wrong way round; congress frequently legislates on matters that aren't explicitly mentioned in the Constitution.
Their own say is... sort of the only one that ultimately matters from a practical standpoint. They wield superseding legal authority.
The sheer fact that THE TRIBE HATES THIS DECISION hasn't factored into your analysis at all, huh. You know so much better than them.
I'm sure your description of events is 100% accurate and not based on the comments of single random people on the internet. You are aware that the context of this is that federal law enforcement quite suddenly became responsible for prosecuting crimes against natives in literally half of Oklahoma two years ago?
Ok so I did a little thinking about this issue and I noticed a pattern around Roe.v.Wade that seems to happen every 4-8years.
First off Roe v. Wade was a court ruling in favor of allowing women access to abortions, however it was never actually written into law.
Turns out that overturning Roe.V.Wade only grants individual states the right to ban or unban abortions, because again there was never any law.
But what I find interesting is the Liberals really like to campaign for abortion when their numbers aren't looking so great. For example Obama promised that the FIRST thing he would do in office would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act into law. Well guess what? He never did that.
Now Biden's approval numbers suck and mid-term elections are happening. So now Biden is doing some Trump level shit, in attacking the supreme court BY NAME, and condeming their choice (which is fine for him, but when Trump asked members of the court to be fair with deciding things he put forth, he got shit one about it), Then he calls for action of Democrats to go and vote because he needs support and like Obama he think's this "hot topic" issue will get his voters out to help him out with other things too.
Here is the thing though. They've had 50 years to make abortion rights a law, and they have campaigned over it basically ever since, using it like a carrot on a stick.
Roe. V. Wade was not a concrete ruling and the court considered it badly worded and presented so they overturned it. They did not attack women's rights. I believe the intention is to get a real abortion law on the ballot so that it can be structured into an actual law, but in order for that to happen people have to vote for it.
So make sure you vote, and also make sure you are aware of the policitian's trying to fuck you over.
First off Roe v. Wade was a court ruling in favor of allowing women access to abortions, however it was never actually written into law.
Turns out that overturning Roe.V.Wade only grants individual states the right to ban or unban abortions, because again there was never any law.
But what I find interesting is the Liberals really like to campaign for abortion when their numbers aren't looking so great. For example Obama promised that the FIRST thing he would do in office would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act into law. Well guess what? He never did that.
Now Biden's approval numbers suck and mid-term elections are happening. So now Biden is doing some Trump level shit, in attacking the supreme court BY NAME, and condeming their choice (which is fine for him, but when Trump asked members of the court to be fair with deciding things he put forth, he got shit one about it), Then he calls for action of Democrats to go and vote because he needs support and like Obama he think's this "hot topic" issue will get his voters out to help him out with other things too.
Here is the thing though. They've had 50 years to make abortion rights a law, and they have campaigned over it basically ever since, using it like a carrot on a stick.
Roe. V. Wade was not a concrete ruling and the court considered it badly worded and presented so they overturned it. They did not attack women's rights. I believe the intention is to get a real abortion law on the ballot so that it can be structured into an actual law, but in order for that to happen people have to vote for it.
So make sure you vote, and also make sure you are aware of the policitian's trying to fuck you over.
Look, I'm sorry, but this is just a truly appallingly argued post from start to finish
This basically isn't true. Obama said he wanted to sign an act when his numbers were fine, and he also said that it wasn't a legislative priority.
...
Do you maybe think SCOTUS overturning Roe v. Wade might have something more to do with it than Biden's numbers (which have been bad for about a year)?
They've barely campaigned on it at all, in the bigger picture.
How exactly do you interpret removing millions of women's right to abortion as not being an attack on women's rights?
Look, there's a SCOTUS ruling sitting right there for about 50 years, which has furthermore been upheld by SCOTUS in a load of challenges since. They had plenty of reason to let it stand, gave mealy mouthed implications in confirmation hearings they would let it stand, and they then chose not to, knowing exactly what it would mean.
This sort of exculpatory nonsense is just staggering gibberish.
Either you have the right to your own body or you don't. Conservatives think you don't (but they have a right to theirs, naturally)
The other alternative is that tribal law applies while you are on the reservation, regardless of whether or not you are an outsider, like how city ordinances and state laws apply to you while in their jurisdictions regardless of if you are an outsider.
...not what that decision says. It basically says they are only allowed to make regulations narrowly within the authority granted to them by Congress and also cannot make any regulations that Congress considered and voted down, because their power stems from and is delegated to them by Congress.
I can't imagine this one will go the way everyone fears - the Supreme Court isn't going to decide that the judiciary has no authority whatsoever over the actions of the legislature, at least regarding elections. They're not going to neuter themselves forevermore to hand the GOP a better chance of a win in one state. That's a huge cost for a tiny payoff.
Supreme Court to take on controversial election-law case
At issue is a legal theory that would give state legislatures unfettered authority to set the rules for federal elections, free of supervision by state courts and state constitutions.www.npr.org
Looks like this midterms will be our last free election.
Its almost like they're the descendants of a slave owning culture or something...
Because I think they are doing it to drum up attention for their own manipulative self-interests (IE. Staying in power). Think about the outrage this generated, now they can use it as a rallying point to campaign off of and build support for the next term.
IN this video he shows clips of Obama directly saying that signing that abortion bill into LAW was the FIRST thing he would do in office. He lied to make it seem important to him in order to get elected and then for 8 fucking years it was never a priority? Funny how that happens aint it.
I'm not arguing that this situation isn't fucked up. The whole point of my post was basically to tell people to go fucking vote, and get your rights turned into laws like they should be. Because here is one of the biggest problems with the outrage mob and demandy leftists.....none of them voted. They complained about Trump, but didn't vote. If you are going to protest and cry for change you have to show up and vote for those fucking changes. Because lawmakers otherwise don't give a shit. The people in power care about votes and about money, and people protesting in the streets means absolutely nothing to them.
SO GO VOTE!
Biden, btw, argued that Roe v. Wade wasn't a solid verdict back in the 1980's. So it's not a new issue for him either. Why isn't he signing the law? Notice how he is calling out the court, when he could issue lawmakers to drum up the Freedom of Choice bill again and sign that shit.
"They didn't get out and vote" sounds mildly insulting when the person they voted for won the popular vote by a wide margin and all three electable parts of government are are slanted against the general population
?? Having other motives doesn't make it less of an attack. If I hit someone in order to provoke a reaction, its still an attack.
Which means the regulatory body cannot actually make regulations, yes.
Like, the EPA has its problems, but at the very least bribing EPA officials is actually illegal, unlike congress
An attack has to have intent imo. Otherwise it's an accident. If you hit someone with your car, it's an accident unless you did it on purpose.
I think this is agenda driven for power and campaign purposes, not specifically women being targeted. Women are just the collateral damage and the fuel for the fire that will drive the political campaigning forward.
And truthfully, the RvW decision didn't have to change anything because all it allowed to happen was the freedom for states to decide whether it's illegal or not. There are states that made no changes and abortion rights are fine, and other states (namely religious ones which is not supposed to be a consideration) banned it immediately because they are motivated by church despite there being no mention of abortion in the bible. Though there is ironically plenty of baby-killing in there so I don't quite understand why the Christians are so annoyed by this tbh.
If you want to suggest that the Democrats have leapt straight on SCOTUS's ruling for money and votes, sure. They have. There is certainly a level of cynicism in the Democratic attitude to having abortion encoded in law, but there was also pragmatism: they had abortion rights, and arguably they did have better things to do. Then the Republicans decided to aggressively stack the court and RBG died a few months too early.
You're watching the video of a right wing political activist. He's not presenting facts neutrally.
Obama is specifically referring in that clip to the Freedom of Choice Act, which was doing the rounds at the time. Bills are passed by the legislature not the president, so Congress would need to pass it in order for it to get to his desk in order to sign it. Democratic legislators left it on the shelf, because (so they said) they didn't have the votes to pass it. One could say that Obama could have pushed the legislature to try to get it through, but that was still no guarantee of success and he did have bigger things to spend political capital on (e.g. the Affordable Care Act).
The Freedom of Choice bill cannot be passed. The Republicans will block it. People like Susan Collins might make moany noises of dissatisfaction at Roe v Wade being reversed, but she is very unlikely to aggravate Republican voters by backing a federal law encoding abortion rights. Even if she and a couple of other Rs did, there are easily 40+ R senators who will block it.
So it requires a Democratic majority in both houses, including a supermajority of 60 in the Senate, unless they can find some way of removing a filibuster. They can't end the filibuster, because some "bipartisan" (ha ha) Democrats like Joe Manchin will shit a brick. (Arguably Joe Manchin might even be right here, because the Republicans look set to dominate the Senate for decades because of all the low population red states, meaning the filibuster is arguably more useful to Democrats than Republicans in the long run strategic view).
Finally, even if a miracle occured and it was passed, consider that SCOTUS has been stacked. Is the Freedom of Choice bill survivable in any form? Because if SCOTUS wants to shoot it down, they can make up a reason to do so. It might be a justification as weak as Roe v. Wade, but it doesn't matter how shit their reason is (they could even literally just say "No, because reasons lol"): once they have killed it, all that effort has gone nowhere and Democrats have to wait for a new SCOTUS composition to go through the whole rigmarole of drumming up a new bill again from scratch.
That's why the Republicans stacked SCOTUS in the first place: the unparallelled ability to decide what laws stick and what don't through the courts. Even if they burn down the reputation of the courts and democracy, they don't give a shit because they've won.
Like... where are you getting this from exactly? Hillary Clinton won the popular vote back in 2016 and Biden won in 2020. And before that Obama won twice. If that wasn't the outrage mob and demandy leftists voting, I guess their votes weren't particularly necessary at all.
The democrates are in power RIGHT NOW, and Roe v. Wade got overturned, so... yeah. People voting for Biden was them voting for change, so what exactly are you getting at? That leftist voters should've voted harder so that Biden had more... voter strength... in order to make changes?
You also have to assume that just because they overturned the poorly ruled RvW, that they will also immediately block any future abortion law or reform. While this might be true, it isn't automatically be true. The justice system moves slow as shit. And this could be a lot of much todo about nothing if in a few months they pass something similar to freedom of choice.
Which could happen and then people will claim it a victory and forgot.
Cite me one person or news source that presents things neutrally. Every newspaper, journalist, magazine, website, etc all leans one way or another. It is not fair to dismiss the presentation of one person just because they are viewed to be on the "enemy" side. That's why politics have such problems to begin with. Instead of focusing on what's good for the people, they are too busy making each other look like villains.
I like that guy's videos because he just critiques videos and articles and he's kind of funny. Nothing more.