Maybe this answers my own question. Sen. Schumer says he prefers to let the voters decide in November.
1 Like
Facts haha
1 Like
The leak is not the real issue. Leaks are planned to stir up the masses.
Wouldn’t supporting abortion be racist since most Planned Parenthood sites are located in minority areas?
Trump derangement syndrome is worn out and the left needs a new rally point to get votes.
5 Likes
I’ve read a lot of conspiracy theories about the leak, both from the right and the left.
Here’s a crazy conspiracy theory I haven’t read, yet: what if SCOTUS purposely leaked the draft opinion to gauge public reaction, before taking a final vote and publishing the official ruling?
2 Likes
They want to debate “my body, my choice”? Hmm, OK 
If this is not a coincidence, it must have been an advice from some vast, cool intellect. Like AOC.
2 Likes
If they had to do this, then they’re seriously out of touch. After all the riots, and CHOPs, and CHOMPs, etc., how could anyone not know public reaction beforehand?
4 Likes
Oh, I don’t know, I’m just trying to play along in the conspiracy theory game.
SCOTUS tries to be secretive with their deliberations, but I’ve read rumors suggesting that some of the justices consider how their opinions will be received. In this case, they could also be testing the response from Congress, and whether they’ll use this as an excuse to pack the court. Like “ends justify means,” it’s “result justifies the ruling.” So I’m just having fun with the idea that SCOTUS leaked the draft opinion, but I also don’t find it beyond the realm of possibility.
2 Likes
Can you imagine the outrage if these 60 million aborted kids were killed by guns? The left would be screaming to get rid of that right. (which is enumerated in the Constitution)
7 Likes
If I can hop aboard the conspiracy train here for a second. If I was on the SCOTUS and knew that my upcoming decision was about to throw an already fragile country into greater turmoil then I might consider leaking the decision beforehand to let off some steam early instead of all at once. I don’t think this is the case but a move like that might help slightly defuse a powder keg. More likely it is just another move to avert attention from the economic cliff our politicians have driven us over.
3 Likes
On a personal note, I don’t find this topic as black and white as most on the right and left seem to. A person has a constitutional right to life and constitutional right to privacy in their bodies, especially, I believe, when something gets put there against their will. Either way this judgement goes people will be losing rights.
More importantly just like we all know anti gun laws don’t stop people from committing crimes with guns, we all should realize that anti abortion laws aren’t going to stop people from getting abortions. The financially able will just go to a State or country where they can get one and the poor will risk their lives doing it themselves or paying for some hack to do it in a back ally. They have the choice of becoming criminals or giving birth to a kid who they know will very likely grow up being uncared for by its parents or society. That is a no win situation for everyone.
I wish the pro life and pro choice people would take a fraction of their passion and commitment to their causes and put it towards working together to prevent unwanted pregnancies. When they do occur those mothers could be offered an alternative to abortion with support during their pregnancy and a clear plan for their child to be given to a loving family if they feel they can’t properly raise them alone. That might actually save a life or two.
I burned out on the whole abortion debate a long time ago, but I still find this to be an interesting story from the point of view of SCOTUS operations, and even more so as a political spectator. Watch how the politicians are reacting: they don’t seem to care about the actual abortion issue nearly as much as they seem to care about fundraising.
But I also recognize that this is not a 2A issue. I have good friends with wildly different opinions on abortion, but they all support 2A. I would hate to see the 2A community divided over something as personal as this. Folks have strong philosophical / religious / political opinions, and they aren’t going to change just because someone on the internet is angry about it.
1 Like
It seems as if the lynch pin is the argument over “right to privacy” which is not in the constitution. Or at least it is my understanding the point that this new decision revolves around.
The words “right to privacy” may not literally be in the Constitution, but there are explicit privacy rights found in the Bill of Rights, there are other explicit rights to privacy in federal law, and your state probably has some laws which protect your privacy as well. “Right to privacy” is much too vague to be constitutionally protected, but the privacy rights we have should be protected.
As for the draft opinion, it’s still a draft.
1 Like
Yes those words are not specifically in the constitution. But the SCOTUS has interpreted them to be implied many times from a combination of amendments. Most people seem to want control over their own bodies and protections from State and Federal laws when it comes to health decisions like vaccines etc. Abortion is obviously a much harder topic because at some point during the pregnancy you are dealing with the rights of two individuals.
This is a very messy moral and legal question. The two sides will never agree. I personally despise abortion but don’t feel I have the divine knowledge and wisdom needed to impose my will on another human beings body. Which is why I would rather see efforts put into prevention and support instead of laws that will further divide this country and not stop abortions from happening. Especially now that abortion pills are available. How long will it take the drug cartels to take advantage of their supply chains to cash in on this new opportunity?
@Ouade5 I do think this will lead to a 2A issue. The only thing I see motivating the Dems to vote in the midterm elections before this was the fact that Trump is still pulling the strings on the Republican Party. But even that highly motivating one trick pony was loosing enough steam to likely led to split party rule which I think is the best option when both parties are corrupt beyond repair. While I think most Republican politicians just pretend to be pro 2A for the votes I am pretty confident a Democratic Senate and House next year will push for a new assault weapon and magazine ban. And very likely succeed. At least in my circles a lot of woman on the left, center and even many on the right care far more about having control over their bodies then their 2A rights. This ruling at this time and the flood of anti abortion laws that will follow will likely be a disaster for 2A rights as swings Washington and eventually the makeup of SCOTUS back to the Left.
Interesting tie in. I can’t disagree. I was just speaking with a relative who is a die-hard Republican and is very excited about the odds of a GOP controlled Congress after November. I warned her not to under-estimate the Republican Party’s ability to shoot themselves in the foot and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. They’ve done it many times in my short life.
I would not suggest that SCOTUS should make any ruling based on the way it could influence an election, but you make a good point that this could have an impact on the midterm elections. It’s been awhile since abortion has been a hot political issue on the national level. This could dramatically affect the political landscape this Autumn, depending on what the final SCOTUS ruling actually reads.
5 Likes
It’s confusing how they want to cite a “right” not expressly defined in the constitution but are free to dismantle a “right” that expressly gives a right?
Am I missing something? Am I/we “infringing on something?”
They want Roe, I want assault rifles and constitutional carry, no questions asked, and they are barred from using the word gun!
There’s no such thing as “gun” violence, it’s gang, criminal and drug violence! I’ve never seen a gun commit a crime!
Really didn’t want this to go in the direction of Roe, this was about a plot and a ploy to undermine the Republic!
IMHO, the “leaker” when caught ( I don’t think they will be ) should be ____________________ fill in the blank!
The leaker will never be caught or revealed! Can you spell Deep Throat?
How many assaults constitute a felony?
If you hit me once that’s assault, if you hit me twice, that’s assault and battery, if you try to beat me to death, that’s attempted murder! Does no one else feel the assaults on a daily basis?
2 Likes
Actually, if you raise your fist or knife, or point your gun ay me, that is assault. If you hit me or shoot at me, that is battery. Depending on the state law, simply displaying a gun without pointing it might be brandishing.
3 Likes
The only row I care about is the kind I need to retrieve my firearms from the aforementioned boating accident.
4 Likes
Despite the semantics, please tell me we’re not going to sit here and make memes if ( god forbid ) a justice or anyone related to the justices is harmed? This is how they win and won! It’s how they will keep winning!
Where do I sign up for the Supreme Court Security team?
I’m an AARP life member, my sofa is in better shape, I can’t afford the gas nor the ammo! Where do I sign? Talk about unworthy!
What do I tell the grandkids? I wrote all the letters, made all the phone calls, emailed till my fingers bled and look where that got us!
How many times do we need to fail before we can claim a win?
4 Likes
Leaking SCOTUS documents is not a crime.
Doxxing justices is not a crime (I am sure it is public info, and protesting on public street is a right)
I am sure that influencing a judicial decision with threats and pressure is against the law somehow, and yet, here we are.
2 Likes