Fresh Start Political Thread

[sdskinsfan2001]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

Regardless of the abortion aspect. They have legalized thought crime in the state. You have a pregnant woman stop and look at clinic on the street and she can now be sued have to pay 10k and pay the legal fees for the person suing her. It is Orwellian at its finest.

Just what we need in America, turn more of us against each other. Good work Texas /s. Ridiculous to profit off of something like that. I could never imagine how hard actually having an abortion is. I'd imagine 99% of them are done with a heavy heart. While I disagree with abortion, I wouldn't ever want to be a woman in a position to even contemplate it. You would have to be a pretty big POS to try to get money off of it.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

Regardless of the abortion aspect. They have legalized thought crime in the state. You have a pregnant woman stop and look at clinic on the street and she can now be sued have to pay 10k and pay the legal fees for the person suing her. It is Orwellian at its finest.

I found this to be the most bizarre part of an already bizarre situation.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

Regardless of the abortion aspect. They have legalized thought crime in the state. You have a pregnant woman stop and look at clinic on the street and she can now be sued have to pay 10k and pay the legal fees for the person suing her. It is Orwellian at its finest.

https://news.yahoo.com/chief-justice...063747804.html

Chief Justice Roberts, 3 other dissenters slam colleagues for hastily rewarding Texas 'bounty hunter' abortion ban scheme


A sharply divided Supreme Court early Thursday said it will not block a new Texas law that deputizes any Texan to enforce a six-week ban on abortions. Five justices — Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett — explained in a brief, unsigned majority opinion that the abortion advocates asking for an emergency stay "raised serious questions regarding the constitutionality of the Texas law at issue," but they were unable to untangle the "complex and novel antecedent procedural questions" raised by the law.

The four dissenters — Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan — argued in separate rebuttals that their five colleagues, without any real debate, were rewarding Texas lawmakers for inventing a novel scheme to stomp on decades of Supreme Court precedent.

"The statutory scheme before the Court is not only unusual, but unprecedented," Roberts wrote, and he would have granted "preliminary relief" at least until "the courts may consider whether a state can avoid responsibility for its laws in such a manner." Instead, the court allowed the law to take effect before lower courts weighed in, "without ordinary merits briefing, and without oral argument."

[mooby]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

Regardless of the abortion aspect. They have legalized thought crime in the state. You have a pregnant woman stop and look at clinic on the street and she can now be sued have to pay 10k and pay the legal fees for the person suing her. It is Orwellian at its finest.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't sue the woman directly for getting an abortion, but you could creepily follow her to an abortion clinic and then accuse the clinic of giving abortions and if you win they give you 10 grand and pay your legal bills.

[SunnySide]

Originally Posted by mooby

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't sue the woman directly for getting an abortion, but you could creepily follow her to an abortion clinic and then accuse the clinic of giving abortions and if you win they give you 10 grand and pay your legal bills.

Youre right. You cant sue or punish the woman directly which is how they are trying to get around the "undue burden". Also by having citizens do it, its not govt action.

A random person doesnt have standing despite Texas legislature trying to create some new jurisprudence.

This will be struck down but the 5 justices allowing it to go forward ... absolutely going against their oath to uphold the law.

Like I said .. very dangerous for the SCOTUS seemingly becoming political. To sit on it is political bc they knew if they acted they would have to strike an unconstitutional law down.

How conservatives can cheer this on .. sad.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

Youre right. You cant sue or punish the woman directly which is how they are trying to get around the "undue burden". Also by having citizens do it, its not govt action.

A random person doesnt have standing despite Texas legislature trying to create some new jurisprudence.

This will be struck down but the 5 justices allowing it to go forward ... absolutely going against their oath to uphold the law.

Like I said .. very dangerous for the SCOTUS seemingly becoming political. To sit on it is political bc they knew if they acted they would have to strike an unconstitutional law down.

How conservatives can cheer this on .. sad.

This. Now that SCOTUS is no longer immune to politics this will push the divide further.

I don't expect Dems to act on it though or to use it to push voters to the polls. I expected a bigger margin in 2020 after 4 years of Trump and the only thing it showed me was conservatives rose up to meet the challenge. If libs stay home next year thinking that everything's gravy because we hold the slimmest of margins in Congress we are going to get our asses kicked and things will get worse.

[SunnySide]

Originally Posted by mooby

This. Now that SCOTUS is no longer immune to politics this will push the divide further.

I don't expect Dems to act on it though or to use it to push voters to the polls. I expected a bigger margin in 2020 after 4 years of Trump and the only thing it showed me was conservatives rose up to meet the challenge. If libs stay home next year thinking that everything's gravy because we hold the slimmest of margins in Congress we are going to get our asses kicked and things will get worse.

Breyer needs to step down, we cant afford another RBG.

[Chico23231]

Weird to see “we don’t need political justices” but then see “we need political justices on our side.”

[SunnySide]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Weird to see “we don’t need political justices” but then see “we need political justices on our side.”

Fair point, irony is not lost on me ... you can thank Mitch for playing politics with the bench. It got him an extra seat.

An extra seat gained by political gamemanship of party over Country. An extra seat for the explicit purpose of providing political and not constitutional results. An extra seat to do exactly what they have done with Texas.

Me personally, ive lost a lot of respect for the SCOTUS. It doesnt stand for what it is supposed to. Justices and laws are supposed to supersede and live above the political game of musical chairs.

Im sure in my lifetime we will see the SCOTUS made a farce. Just add a zillion justices to make it what it is, a kangaroo court portending to be neutral and unbiased to political affiliation.

------------

regardless of what you think about abortion or when the cutoff should be ... you cannot argue that Roe v Wade and its predecessors are not established Constitutional law ... that the conservative 5 have decided to play politics with.

^^ you cant argue against this. Roe is the established law of the land. SCOTUS playing games to get around it without actually addressing it .. shameful.

[Chico23231]

Lol…Roe vs Wade exists, it hasn’t been changed. The Texas law centers on fetal heartbeat. I get you don’t like it. I mean here in Virginia some fucking lunatic tried to pass a state law saying you could kill a child up to time of birth, on the day of birth.

Honest to god question, which turns your stomach more?

[SunnySide]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Lol…Roe vs Wade exists, it hasn’t been changed. The Texas law centers on fetal heartbeat. I get you don’t like it. I mean here in Virginia some fucking lunatic tried to pass a state law saying you could kill a child up to time of birth, on the day of birth.

Honest to god question, which turns your stomach more?

The VA law would have allowed euthanization of a baby born that couldnt live on its own or serious deformities.

Honest answer - the VA. But one was shot down quickly and the other was actually made law.

--

honest question to you - do you think the 5 justices allowing the Texas law to go into effect without staying it until arguments could be heard is political judicial activism?

[nonniey]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

The VA law would have allowed euthanization of a baby born that couldnt live on its own or serious deformities.

Honest answer - the VA. But one was shot down quickly and the other was actually made law.

--

honest question to you - do you think the 5 justices allowing the Texas law to go into effect without staying it until arguments could be heard is political judicial activism?

Well there is always Vermont's 2019 law.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

The VA law would have allowed euthanization of a baby born that couldnt live on its own or serious deformities.

Honest answer - the VA. But one was shot down quickly and the other was actually made law.

--

honest question to you - do you think the 5 justices allowing the Texas law to go into effect without staying it until arguments could be heard is political judicial activism?

Im not sure. I really didn’t look at there reasons why or don’t know if I would entirely understand it. But like I’ve said I do disagree with the law. As I disagree with New York and the attempt here in VA. But I do know roe vs wade still stands

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Im not sure. I really didn’t look at there reasons why or don’t know if I would entirely understand it. But like I’ve said I do disagree with the law. As I disagree with New York and the attempt here in VA. But I do know roe vs wade still stands

their...

It stands but not in Texas. Let's not forget they also are free to carry guns anywhere, this is not going to end well. All Texians are now Bounty hunters.

[Giantone]

There are an awful lot of men arguing on what Women should do with their own bodies ,that's BS.