US Supreme Court nullifies Roe v Wade (abortion) ruling

[-:Undertaker:-]

THE SUPREME COURT HAS OVERTURNED ROE V. WADE, ELIMINATING THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO ABORTION.https://t.co/ZNYRs3QnpJ

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 24, 2022

I'm sorry the Constitution is happening to you. Or rather, I'm glad that the Constitution is happening to preborn children.

— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) June 24, 2022

This might come as a shock to you Sadiq but abortion isn't a constitutionally protected legal right in the UK either. Or the vast majority of other liberal democracies in the World. Get on with your day job. How is the London murder rate going? https://t.co/jvUAPFeSTb

— John Duffield (@jfwduffield) June 24, 2022

You literally did this with vaccines, you idiot. https://t.co/RkzpmRjRDQ

— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) June 24, 2022

The US Constitution creates no rights. It presumes some to be in existence and precludes the gov't from infringing upon or removing them.

Once that's understood, it is easier to see why the court's decision today was legally correct.

— Bec de Corbin (@De_Corbin_Bec) June 24, 2022

There are so many bad takes on this particularly from British commentators so I will outline what has happened.

Basically, unlike Britain and most other western democracies, America has a powerful Supreme Court which since World War II has increasingly become political. Social issues such as abortion, which are not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, are political issues which are supposed to be dealt with at a state level by elected representatives. However, in 1973 the then-Left dominated Supreme Court decided to make a political decision and impose abortion on even those states whose elected representatives did not want it.

Now, the current court - which is still political but towards the Right - has not enforced its own view of abortion on the entirety of the United States, but instead has found there is no constitutional basis for the 1973 decision (known as Roe v Wade) to still stand as it is not a constitutional issue. Therefore, the issue of abortion (a political issue) can now be dealt with was originally intended, at a state level. So California may wish to have very lax abortion laws even until the point of birth, while Alabama may wish to ban it completely. As two hypothetical examples.

All in all, no matter what your view on abortion (I am obviously against) I think we ought to all agree that issues like abortion should be decided by elected representatives who are accountable to the people, rather than unelected judges involved in judicial activism. So well done the SCOTUS for withdrawing its remit from this issue and handing it back to the people and their representatives.

Thoughts?

[Seatherny]

What a shameful decision. A woman should be able to decide what grows inside her. Can't have an abortion even in the cases of rape and be forced to have a child? Wow, what a shameful decision.

American's want to save lives they say by banning abortion, but they are happy to allow guns to kill children every few months.

Innocent humans such as Savita Halappanavar have died due to people wishing to force their own backward and twisted thinking on others.

America is not a developed country or a third world country, it is a fifth world country, creating wars for profits, interfering in other countries business and failing, killing their own soldiers for money, killing children and passing sexist laws.

As SCOTUS say, not long till the ban same sex marriage too.

[-:Undertaker:-]

What a shameful decision. A woman should be able to decide what grows inside her. Can't have an abortion even in the cases of rape and be forced to have a child? Wow, what a shameful decision.

American's want to save lives they say by banning abortion, but they are happy to allow guns to kill children every few months.

Innocent humans such as Savita Halappanavar have died due to people wishing to force their own backward and twisted thinking on others.

America is not a developed country or a third world country, it is a fifth world country, creating wars for profits, interfering in other countries business and failing, killing their own soldiers for money, killing children and passing sexist laws.

As SCOTUS say, not long till the ban same sex marriage too.

The court hasn't banned abortion, it has simply said that abortion laws are not within the remit of the constitution (and thus Supreme Court).

[Seatherny]

The court hasn't banned abortion, it has simply said that abortion laws are not within the remit of the constitution (and thus Supreme Court).

So having control of your own body is not within the remit of the constitution? One bench believes it is, and now DJT bench believe it isn't? America is truly on the same level as North Korea. Others dictating what can happen to your body/future. They may not have banned abortion, but their ruling has allowed several states to ban abortion.

A country which fails to ban guns despite innocent people/kids being shot weekly is not a developed country. Americans really are stupid.

[-:Undertaker:-]

So having control of your own body is not within the remit of the constitution? One bench believes it is, and now DJT bench believe it isn't? America is truly on the same level as North Korea. Others dictating what can happen to your body/future. They may not have banned abortion, but their ruling has allowed several states to ban abortion.

A country which fails to ban guns despite innocent people/kids being shot weekly is not a developed country. Americans really are stupid.

Parliament in our country "dictates" what a woman can and cannot do with her body in regards to abortion. Parliament has decreed, not by right but by legislation, that a British woman cannot abort her child after the 24 week limit unless in exceptional circumstances. I do not understand where this idea that abortion is a an unlimited right comes from, other than from people who seemingly are mixing up what the Burger Court in 1973 declared, to be somehow a universal right for all women worldwide.

Abortion is not a constitutional right in almost all western countries including the UK, and almost all western countries dictate the terms (if, how and when) of abortions.

[HotelUser]

Parliament has decreed, not by right but by legislation, that a British woman cannot abort her child after the 24 week limit unless in exceptional circumstances

Now around half of Americans wont have this option at all:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...oe-v-wade.html

Alabama, Arkansas, Missouri, SD don't even have exceptions for rape or incest.

Should the US congress & senate have passed a constitutional amendment to codify a right to an abortion long ago? Yes. But that certainly doesn't mean overturning Roe was the right decision either. It's been the law for 50 years, and the SCOTUS's argument that the 14th amendment doesn't apply because abortion isn't a "deeply and long held American tradition" lacks credibility too because women couldn't even vote until 1920 and there were no women judges until the 20th century, so how could it have been a tradition to begin with if the system itself was simply rigged against women that the basis of this decision-- against women again-- was based upon?

[-:Undertaker:-]

Now around half of Americans wont have this option at all:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...oe-v-wade.html

Alabama, Arkansas, Missouri, SD don't even have exceptions for rape or incest.

Should the US congress & senate have passed a constitutional amendment to codify a right to an abortion long ago? Yes. But that certainly doesn't mean overturning Roe was the right decision either. It's been the law for 50 years, and the SCOTUS's argument that the 14th amendment doesn't apply because abortion isn't a "deeply and long held American tradition" lacks credibility too because women couldn't even vote until 1920 and there were no women judges until the 20th century, so how could it have been a tradition to begin with if the system itself was simply rigged against women that the basis of this decision-- against women again-- was based upon?

1. Make these arguments then for abortion in your state elections when you elect your houses of representatives, senates and governors.

2. Alternatively as you mentioned, secure the two-thirds supermajority at a national level needed to amend the constitution.


If you cannot do either of these then I would suggest your pro-abortion arguments are not as universally popular as you seem to believe. If they are not universally accepted by your fellow countrymen, then given you live in a federal republic it is only to be expected that there will be differences in law on this across the country.

[HotelUser]

1. Make these arguments then for abortion in your state elections when you elect your houses of representatives, senates and governors.

2. Alternatively as you mentioned, secure the two-thirds supermajority at a national level needed to amend the constitution.


If you cannot do either of these then I would suggest your pro-abortion arguments are not as universally popular as you seem to believe. If they are not universally accepted by your fellow countrymen, then given you live in a federal republic it is only to be expected that there will be differences in law on this across the country.

I live in California now which is very pro-choice fortunately, and so is Canada where I'm originally from.

Yes I think #2 will be the long term goal now. I've heard somewhat cynically for years that neither party has wanted to change the status quo on abortion rights because it's a great issue for fundraising. Maybe that's why neither party ever championed a constitutional amendment despite having have a century to do so. A majority of Americans already support abortion and nearly 70% didn't want the SCOTUS to overturn Roe. Around 80% of Americans say abortion should also be allowed in cases of rape, invest or when the mother's live is in danger. So all that said I imagine and hope we will see a constitutional amendment at some point in the future to guarantee a right to an abortion.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I live in California now which is very pro-choice fortunately, and so is Canada where I'm originally from.

Yes I think #2 will be the long term goal now. I've heard somewhat cynically for years that neither party has wanted to change the status quo on abortion rights because it's a great issue for fundraising. Maybe that's why neither party ever championed a constitutional amendment despite having have a century to do so. A majority of Americans already support abortion and nearly 70% didn't want the SCOTUS to overturn Roe. Around 80% of Americans say abortion should also be allowed in cases of rape, invest or when the mother's live is in danger. So all that said I imagine and hope we will see a constitutional amendment at some point in the future to guarantee a right to an abortion.

See that's fine, I have no issue if these things are decided through the legislature and not the courts.

As someone who opposes abortion, I would similarly campaign to have abortion made illegal nationwide via a constitutional amendment.

[HotelUser]

As someone who opposes abortion, I would similarly campaign to have abortion made illegal nationwide via a constitutional amendment.

Even in cases where the mother's life is in danger or in cases of rape or incest?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._birth_mothers

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...on-rape-victim

Unfortunately I personally could never see this as a black or white issue like that. I think there's a lot of grey area here and a lot of circumstances where an abortion is the right decision. I don't trust the state to do a good job figuring out what all those circumstances are, and even if they could it would be unduly invasive for women to put up with. So for me I think we should allow women to do what they want and make the right choices for themselves. Some tiny fraction of people will abuse it but then again that happens with every right / privilege that exists.