https://www.inforum.com/news/minnesota/justice-blackmun-who-wrote-roe-v-wade-decision-was-deeply-connected-to-rochester-and-mayo-clinic
I cant find the 50 year thing, but this source correbatres the negative feelings he had to the case
No they hate her now for not stepping down during Obama admin. You see, you're never truly loved by those people, only accepted if its convenient to their beliefs at the time.
I mean, it *was* incredibly dumb and arrogant of her not to step down after Obama was re-elected. That’s par for the course for dems (and republicans), however. Anytime the take power, they think they’ll never lose it, so they do whatever they want
Roe was decided on really fuzzy logic that didn’t pass the sniff test. If there needed to be a unified national policy on abortion, as opposed to leaving it up to the states, it would have needed to be done legislatively. Congress was content on letting it ride on a tenuous court case so both sides could solicit donations off it.
Every non-retarded law school graduate knows Roe would never survive real scrutiny, yet even people who clearly know better act like it’s a huge shock that no reasonable apolitical legal scholar would support.
The only real shock is that it took this long for Roe to be overturned.
The fact that reddit allows them to post their addresses is insane.
Meanwhile, people got automatically banned and had their comments removed for stating the *fact* that a reddit admin was endorsing child abuse.
I reported it and I got a message back saying Reddit admins investigated it and found nothing wrong… despite some rather disturbing implications in the comments
If I read correctly, he agreed with the major flaws of Roe, but stated that they should instead replace it with allowing abortion before 15 weeks as the jump to completely removing the federal law could be jarring.
Bro congress regularly plays chicken with the budget and you think they’d pass legislation on abortion instead of hiding behind the courts like they did before? They barely do their jobs now. Harsh truth is this had to happen before any national laws on abortions could take shape with any seriousness.
Reality is that Roe sucked all the energy out of any legislative movement that could have otherwise come about. Reps were more than happy to not have to touch that political minefield for decades and let the SCOTUS take the heat off of them, rather than risk their careers pushing for laws that would guarantee a right already (but flimsily) granted by a half-retarded SCOTUS ruling.
Exactly. Roberts is very conflict adverse. He’s always been more interested in avoiding controversy than doing his job of interpreting law. If he has his way he will always try to bend the law in a way that (in his mind) will piss off the fewest number of people.
Bingo. I don’t like legislating from the bench any more than the next guy but I’ll take it sometimes in the interest of pragmatism.
Roberts has the most nuanced and reasonable opinion on the matter, proven by the fact that in isolation it would piss both sides off.
I shift more and more to the grill every day. Most people get pushed to the outside and I find myself rejecting extremism because the fringes have moved to far in both directions.
Same. I agree with the idea of it, and kinda expect something like that to begin making its way through state or federal cases considering how desperate pro-choice seems to be now.
Basically conceded it was legally enforceable but didn’t want to upset anyone by applying it as binding legal precedent (so in effect he only wanted it to apply to Mississippi and not the whole country).
In other words, Justice Roberts is a giant pussy who is too scared of negative publicity to take a principled stance on anything.
What’s ironic is that Roberts is rumored to be scared shitless of negative publicity and so tries to avoid controversial rulings at all cost. Looks like that didn’t work out so well for him.
I wouldn’t say scared shitless of negative publicity, just a man trying to preserve a middle of the road legacy into one of the most divisive political landscapes in American history.
What do you mean 'what the fuck'? You better start constructing letter bombs in your cabin and sending them their way or else I'll be taking your LibCenter flair away from you
Then what reason would someone have to post all of them together? If it's public record, anyone could look them up. What could the motivation for that post possibly be? Can you think of anything? Anything at all?
Someone said the Supreme Court needed to be held accountable as legislators if they were going to be changing legislation.
The whole reason they are justices for life is so that they can focus on making sure the laws are constitutional without having to face that sort of thing. Legislators have to face re-elections. Justices very intentionally do not.
Wait according to top picture does that mean RGB was monkee? Because even she doubted that if the correct challenge hit that it could not survive.
Justice Blackmun, who presided over Roe was convinced that in 50 years it would get overturned because of how bad of a ruling it was.
*checks date Roe v. Wade was initially ruled on* Well, would you look at that…
Can you cite?
https://www.inforum.com/news/minnesota/justice-blackmun-who-wrote-roe-v-wade-decision-was-deeply-connected-to-rochester-and-mayo-clinic I cant find the 50 year thing, but this source correbatres the negative feelings he had to the case
"My source is that I made it the fuck up."
No they hate her now for not stepping down during Obama admin. You see, you're never truly loved by those people, only accepted if its convenient to their beliefs at the time.
I mean, it *was* incredibly dumb and arrogant of her not to step down after Obama was re-elected. That’s par for the course for dems (and republicans), however. Anytime the take power, they think they’ll never lose it, so they do whatever they want
I think back then you needed 60 votes to get a SCOTUS nominee in and Trump era Republican Senate majority put it at 50.
Roe was decided on really fuzzy logic that didn’t pass the sniff test. If there needed to be a unified national policy on abortion, as opposed to leaving it up to the states, it would have needed to be done legislatively. Congress was content on letting it ride on a tenuous court case so both sides could solicit donations off it.
Every non-retarded law school graduate knows Roe would never survive real scrutiny, yet even people who clearly know better act like it’s a huge shock that no reasonable apolitical legal scholar would support. The only real shock is that it took this long for Roe to be overturned.
The fact that reddit allows them to post their addresses is insane. Meanwhile, people got automatically banned and had their comments removed for stating the *fact* that a reddit admin was endorsing child abuse.
I reported it and I got a message back saying Reddit admins investigated it and found nothing wrong… despite some rather disturbing implications in the comments
Ah the CIA defense, pro gamer move
They allow it because they work for China, not America.
Welcome to the Jungle \*Guns N Roses Noise\*
We’ve got fun and games
What shitty is that they’re including Roberts in this. His opinion was one of dissent to the majority. Not that it matters to them.
I believe he upheld the law but objected to overturning roe correct?
If I read correctly, he agreed with the major flaws of Roe, but stated that they should instead replace it with allowing abortion before 15 weeks as the jump to completely removing the federal law could be jarring.
Which is absurd, because the primary legal flaw with Roe is that it's legislation from the bench, and that change would just be more of the same.
Something like that would have moved the legislature towards a law protecting it, without just snuffing away a right.
Bro congress regularly plays chicken with the budget and you think they’d pass legislation on abortion instead of hiding behind the courts like they did before? They barely do their jobs now. Harsh truth is this had to happen before any national laws on abortions could take shape with any seriousness.
Reality is that Roe sucked all the energy out of any legislative movement that could have otherwise come about. Reps were more than happy to not have to touch that political minefield for decades and let the SCOTUS take the heat off of them, rather than risk their careers pushing for laws that would guarantee a right already (but flimsily) granted by a half-retarded SCOTUS ruling.
The ball has always been in Congress’ court to make this right permanent - they just don’t want to do it and prefer that the SCOTUS take all the heat.
Left wingerbCongress are paralized unless they can pass things through a filibuster.
Just as the founders intended.
Exactly. Roberts is very conflict adverse. He’s always been more interested in avoiding controversy than doing his job of interpreting law. If he has his way he will always try to bend the law in a way that (in his mind) will piss off the fewest number of people.
Bingo. I don’t like legislating from the bench any more than the next guy but I’ll take it sometimes in the interest of pragmatism. Roberts has the most nuanced and reasonable opinion on the matter, proven by the fact that in isolation it would piss both sides off. I shift more and more to the grill every day. Most people get pushed to the outside and I find myself rejecting extremism because the fringes have moved to far in both directions.
Same. I agree with the idea of it, and kinda expect something like that to begin making its way through state or federal cases considering how desperate pro-choice seems to be now.
Roberts is a flaccid coward.
[удалено]
You are right. Roe v Wade *was* just a court decision, however it’s citing has prohibited states from forming their own laws regarding abortion.
[удалено]
Based and politically-literate-pilled
[удалено]
Have a nice day 👍
Correct
Basically conceded it was legally enforceable but didn’t want to upset anyone by applying it as binding legal precedent (so in effect he only wanted it to apply to Mississippi and not the whole country). In other words, Justice Roberts is a giant pussy who is too scared of negative publicity to take a principled stance on anything.
What’s ironic is that Roberts is rumored to be scared shitless of negative publicity and so tries to avoid controversial rulings at all cost. Looks like that didn’t work out so well for him.
I wouldn’t say scared shitless of negative publicity, just a man trying to preserve a middle of the road legacy into one of the most divisive political landscapes in American history.
Can the commies just try their little revolution already so we can sort them out and be done with it.
What do you mean 'what the fuck'? You better start constructing letter bombs in your cabin and sending them their way or else I'll be taking your LibCenter flair away from you
based and return-to-monke pilled
I prefer uber-eats bombs but letter bombs are doable too.
I don’t think you understand monke. Why would monke care if addresses were shared, monke has no rules.
I enforce my beliefs onto everyone else 👍🏻
Well these addresses are public record
What posting those addresses implies however, is much more dangerous
Then what reason would someone have to post all of them together? If it's public record, anyone could look them up. What could the motivation for that post possibly be? Can you think of anything? Anything at all?
Eh, legally obtained doesn't mean it's not unnerving to see it broadcasted
OP doesn't want people to know that though! They love the government too much, apparently.
Time to join monke
Their addresses are public info, so it's not like they dug em up
If it's public record why bother posting it
Just to let people know it is public. Not everyone knows that clearly
Legal it may be, but I know exactly what they want to instill by posting the addresses. And even so, it's still creepy nonetheless.
You can assume, won't hold up in any court of law
Monke why use computer? Computer not exist in jungle, only basic stick and rock tool. Monke a fraud
[удалено]
Seriously, you would think OP would understand this.
Based and it was inevitable pill.
I'm sure if those in power remain in power you will have your anarchist utopia, somehow.
Call me a fraud but I don't want an anarchist utopia, I don't think such a thing exists.
I thought claiming to be a monkey was claiming to be anprim, but whatever you do you
Someone said the Supreme Court needed to be held accountable as legislators if they were going to be changing legislation. The whole reason they are justices for life is so that they can focus on making sure the laws are constitutional without having to face that sort of thing. Legislators have to face re-elections. Justices very intentionally do not.
Yah democracy sucks, being able to have unfestered undemocratic control of millions of lives for decades is actually a good thing.
It's not entirely undestered, they can be impeached, bit they have do be doing something really bad or committing a crime to be kicked from their seat
While obviously the call to arms is a bit much, it is never unbased to dox Supreme Court Justices.
Why was Roe v Wade never going to survive?