roe GONE

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

Ya in practical terms this will mean people will have to drive probably an average of 200 miles in order to kill their baby.

Unless they're doing it like literally every 3-4 months, it really isn't that big of an inconvenience.

The real reason that the libtards are upset, is because they can't accept that other people can have opinions different than their own. They must be forced to conform.

This is where insurance companies come into play. Health insurance is generally state specific unless in the case of an emergency. People can travel out of state for abortions but will have to pay out of pocket. Good luck getting Medicaid, state run insurance for the indigent to pay for an out of state abortion.
Maybe that digital currency thing will make little brother (states) spy on your illegal action of going to get an illegal abortion across state lines. Maybe they won't charge you for getting an illegal abortion but charge you with Murder when you return. Maybe all the leftists and politicians will once again think cash is good and should not be messed with.

[Voluntarist]

Maybe they won't charge you for getting an illegal abortion but charge you with Murder when you return.

I was going to ask why one state would have jurisdiction over a murder committed in another state, but damn if there isn't a precedent for it: Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82 (1985).

[Invisible Man]

I was going to ask why one state would have jurisdiction over a murder committed in another state, but damn if there isn't a precedent for it: Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82 (1985).

That was a case where elements of the crime happened in both states, and that fact was crucial to their both being able to prosecute him.

The prosecutor argued, however, that because the defendant's wife had been kidnapped in Alabama, the murder "may be punished" there.

I don't think that states can prosecute crimes that wholly occurred in other states. Supposedly Kavanaugh made a point about this in his opinion to the effect that states can't prosecute people for travelling to other states to get abortions. I haven't read his opinion for myself yet though.

[69360]

Liberal cities rioting...........

Ho-hum.

Except they didn't.

[Voluntarist]

I don't think that states can prosecute crimes that wholly occurred in other states. Supposedly Kavanaugh made a point about this in his opinion to the effect that states can't prosecute people for travelling to other states to get abortions. I haven't read his opinion for myself yet though.

I wonder if that means we'll see a slew of laws making it illegal for a pregnant woman to transport a fetus across their state border for the purpose of aborting it. That'd be similar to the Mann Act. However, the Mann Act is a federal law; could a state do something like that on it's own?

We better get the anti-abortion states working on this. They have a compelling interest in the eggs fertilized within their borders (women have no right to conceal their pregnancy information). Whoa, maybe those states even have a compelling interest in the fertilized eggs passing through their borders on their way from a state where abortion is illegal to another state where an abortion can be performed.

We may need to start tracking the purchase of pregnancy test kits.

[Invisible Man]

I wonder if that means we'll see a slew of laws making it illegal for a pregnant woman to transport a fetus across their state border for the purpose of aborting it. That'd be similar to the Mann Act. However, the Mann Act is a federal law; could a state do something like that on it's own?

We better get the anti-abortion states working on this. They have a compelling interest in the fertilized eggs created within their borders (women have no right to conceal their pregnancy information). Whoa, maybe those states even have a compelling interest in the fertilized eggs passing through their borders on their way from one state to another state where an abortion can be performed.

When and if that becomes politically feasible at the federal level (with both houses of Congress and a President who support it), yes, I think there's a good chance of that.

Pro-lifers are pushing for stronger federal legislation than that, up to the point of a nationwide ban or at least very strict restrictions. I don't know what the changes are that they would get that, even when the GOP controls Congress and the WH again. But it will be more than just one of those crazy bills that gets introduced by some extremist and goes nowhere. It will be a serious proposal with significant Republican support.

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

The best thing that could happen is they make it illegal under any circumstances for a pregnant woman to abort her fetus if she resides in that state. That would be the natural way for crazy Liberals to gravitate to the Liberal hell holes they deserve and Conservatives to enjoy their own way of life. Why should every state be subject to wokeness?

[Anti Federalist]

When and if that becomes politically feasible at the federal level (with both houses of Congress and a President who support it), yes, I think there's a good chance of that.

Pro-lifers are pushing for stronger federal legislation than that, up to the point of a nationwide ban or at least very strict restrictions. I don't know what the changes are that they would get that, even when the GOP controls Congress and the WH again. But it will be more than just one of those crazy bills that gets introduced by some extremist and goes nowhere. It will be a serious proposal with significant Republican support.

I see it going the other way.

The feds will step up efforts to make the anti abortion states get in line.

They will use the time tested method of not out right mandating that states allow, fund and carry out abortions, but withholding federal dollars for failure to comply.

[Invisible Man]

I see it going the other way.

The feds will step up efforts to make the anti abortion states get in line.

They will use the time tested method of not out right mandating that states allow, fund and carry out abortions, but withholding federal dollars for failure to comply.

I see that too.

Both sides are going to push for federal legislation. It will come down to who pulls it off.

But I tend to agree with you that something more on the pro-choice side will more likely prevail.

And if and when that happens, if anybody thinks that yesterday's ruling is a harbinger of such future federal legislation being overturned on the grounds that they think SCOTUS will say it has to be left up to the states, then I think those people will be proven wrong on that day. And in fact, I see yesterday's ruling as SCOTUS passing the buck back to Congress and saying, "Don't expect us to tell states they have to allow abortion, that's your job." When and if Congress takes SCOTUS up on that challenge, SCOTUS will simply say, "Good, that's just what we told you to do."

[Krugminator2]

The amusing part of this is how wildly incoherent left wing and conservative justices are at applying their legal philosophies. If you accept the original Roe reasoning (I do), then you logically have to accept the reasoning of Lochner. It can't be any other way.

Alito (who along with every other justice reject Lochner) pointed this out in the majority opinion. The left wing's dissenting opinion addresses this by saying freedom of contract is different because well.... reasons. So 18 year old girl, her body her choice for abortion. Same 18 year old girl working for five dollars an hour not her body her choice because social justice or something.

On the other hand conservative justices shoot down gun laws at the state level (I agree) because the Constitution supersedes the states. But want to relitigate abortion and same sex marriage. Abortion is semi-reasonable because determining when life begins is debatable. But overturning Obergfell will delegitimize the court completely and make it seen as a means for political activism

[oyarde]

I could see anti abortion restrictions even eventually making it into the state constitution here but large cities wont prosecute what will become illegal abortions if they can find a clinic to pefform them . Although there are only six clinics left and I expect that number to decline they stay busy , churning out 7800 per yr . You'll be able to go to illinois.

[tod evans]

Except they didn't.

It's only a matter of time.

[RJB]

It's only a matter of time.

They shut down the interstate in the town next to me last night. That was spur of the moment. I have a feeling that they are just getting warmed up.

[69360]

They shut down the interstate in the town next to me last night. That was spur of the moment. I have a feeling that they are just getting warmed up.

You go to jail for that in Florida. It's also legal to run them over.

It's only a matter of time.

I don't think so, I of course expect some isolated incidents, but nothing organized and nationwide. It's much easier to complain on the internet and liberals are generally lazy.

[A Son of Liberty]

Abortion is semi-reasonable because determining when life begins is debatable.

It's really not, though. At conception, a genetically distinct individual human being exists. It is at a stage of it's development in that moment that is every bit as legitimate as the day after, and the day after that, and the day after that all the way thru his/her birth, adolescence, puberty, adulthood, decline, seniority, and up to the moment of death.

I just don't see where this is debatable at all. I've seen every argument to the contrary - "viability"; well, viability is constantly changing due to advancements in medicine. And frankly without modern medicine, viability is a period well into early adolescence, at best. So if "viability" is the point at which a "fetus" becomes a human being, then practically abortion is legitimate up to the age of 12, likely. "Sentience"; there are moments in a humans life where they are clearly not sentient. Do they lose their humanity in those moments? "Spontaneous abortion/miscarriage"; utter nonsense - no one is getting arrested if I have a sudden heart attack and die. Life ends. It happens. Sometimes it happens in the womb, and sometimes it happens when a person is 115 years old.

It is NOT debatable as to when life begins. A single cell bacteria is considered "life" by "science", but we're still pretending that a genetically distinct, growing and developing human embryo is not human life. It's absurd.

I can at least respect the pro-abortionists who acknowledge that it's a human life and still demand the right to murder it at their whim, like Caitlin Johnstone (unfortunately) - at least they're being honest; but this piddling nonsense about "well, we're not really sure when it actually becomes 'life'" is just a freaking cop out.

[Sonny Tufts]

But overturning Obergfell will delegitimize the court completely and make it seen as a means for political activism

Obergfell, unlike Roe, had an Equal Protection element in its rationale, so I think it's easily distinguishable from Dobbs.

[Krugminator2]

Obergfell, unlike Roe, had an Equal Protection element in its rationale, so I think it's easily distinguishable from Dobbs.

That is what I think too with specifically Obergefell. You know infinitely more than me about this stuff. But it seems like the contraceptive decision and sodomy laws are less certain. I can't believe those would be challenged but....


“We should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergfell,” Thomas wrote.

And worth pointing out what the namesake of the site said about this. Third paragraph. I could not disagree more but it certainly is a line of thought. https://www.lewrockwell.com/2003/08/...-constitution/

[Matt4Liberty]

[/I]And worth pointing out what the namesake of the site said about this. Third paragraph. I could not disagree more but it certainly is a line of thought. https://www.lewrockwell.com/2003/08/...-constitution/

The third paragraph in question"

Consider the Lawrence case decided by the Supreme Court in June. The Court determined that Texas had no right to establish its own standards for private sexual conduct, because gay sodomy is somehow protected under the 14th amendment “right to privacy.” Ridiculous as sodomy laws may be, there clearly is no right to privacy nor sodomy found anywhere in the Constitution. There are, however, states’ rights — rights plainly affirmed in the Ninth and Tenth amendments. Under those amendments, the State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards. But rather than applying the real Constitution and declining jurisdiction over a properly state matter, the Court decided to apply the imaginary Constitution and impose its vision on the people of Texas.

That takes some real mental gymnastics to disagree with.

[Krugminator2]

The third paragraph in question"


That takes some real mental gymnastics to disagree with.

Rand Paul and every libertarian legal theorist that I know of disagree.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/reason.com/2013/04/11/rand-paul-vs-ron-paul-on-the-constitutio/%3famp

Unless Ron Paul has changed his legal philosophy since 2005 he would have to oppose the recent gun decision. He thought the Fifth Amendment didn't apply for eminent domain for private businesses is reasonable if done below the federal level. https://www.lewrockwell.com/2005/07/...ction-in-kelo/

[Anti Globalist]

Admittedly I never actually thought Roe v. Wade would ever be overturned. I've said for years that every election cycle, whether it's a presidential election or a mid term election, Republicans always campaign on saying that if people vote enough of them in the House and Senate, they'll get it overturned eventually only for it to be nothing more than pandering for votes.

[Occam's Banana]

Liberal cities rioting...........

Ho-hum.

They're comin' to getcha, tod! Aren't you scared? Oooooooooooh!

[acptulsa]

So, there are 16,410 incorporated towns with a population of under 10,000, and at a bare minimum, half again as many unincorporated settlements. That figure of 100 foaming at the mouth liberals per has me curious. Have they got twenty-five million insane people at their beck and call, or are they going to travel from town to village and expect to maintain the element of surprise?

[tod evans]

They're comin' to getcha, tod! Aren't you scared? Oooooooooooh!

Tremblin' in my boots.....

[tod evans]

So, there are 16,410 incorporated towns with a population of under 10,000, and at a bare minimum, half again as many unincorporated settlements. That figure of 100 foaming at the mouth liberals per has me curious. Have they got twenty-five million insane people at their beck and call, or are they going to travel from town to village and expect to maintain the element of surprise?

100?

Hell they'll loose 1/2 their force to teenagers and farm dogs....And that's before the farm wife gets up off the porch.

Bubba won't even have to get off the tractor if that's what they send.

[acptulsa]

100?

Hell they'll loose 1/2 their force to teenagers and farm dogs....And that's before the farm wife gets up off the porch.

Bubba won't even have to get off the tractor if that's what they send.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying they shouldn't try it. They never let the fact that their plans were stupid stop them before. I'd hate for them not to try one more stupid plan, especially one that could so easily be their last.

[Anti Federalist]

I dare you...I triple dog dare you.

Your friends may overrun my fat ass in a rush, but not before I turn your head into a canoe.

Open fire motherfucker, please...

[dannno]

They're comin' to getcha, tod! Aren't you scared? Oooooooooooh!

Good argument for abolishing limits on magazine size.

[Occam's Banana]

Good argument for abolishing ignoring limits on magazine size.

Fixed.

(3D printer go brrrrr)

[A Son of Liberty]

They're comin' to getcha, tod! Aren't you scared? Oooooooooooh!

If they would kindly do us the favor of bringing along exactly 100 body bags, we would greatly appreciate the convenience. Hell if they'd go one step further and dig 100 6'x2'x6' holes on the outskirts of town before they marched in, I'd give their next of kin 20 whole bucks, and a rose.

"Their towns are defenseless" LMAO. These people have no idea what's in store for them in rural America. For every 100 of them, 10 will hang from trees on the road into town as a warning to the next band of city dwellers thinking the outskirts are easy pickings.

[oyarde]

Any way now that I'm a radical Christian instead of just a Missouri Synod one and I'm defenseless I guess they'll be coming for me yet . State police in AZ had to tear gas the lustful , wanton baby killers who were trying to kick in glass at te state senate while in session. Hopefully these dangerous inserrectionists are being rounded up to be assigned to chain gangs . They had a sign that said they demand reproductive justice now. People who have the perspective that killing an innocent can be called justice have no place in my society. They should be exterminated. If they want to do it at least call it what it is and test how popular that is .