The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
FAQ    Search

Board index » Word on the Street » News & Debate




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3819 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173 ... 191  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 6:22 pm 
Offline
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 3:41 am
Posts: 5562
Green Habit wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
The obvious retort to Thomas wanting to reconsider all those other cases decided on substantive due process grounds is that they can all be answered on Equal Protection Clause grounds instead. That's what O'Connor wanted to do this in Lawrence to try to justify joining the majority in Bowers.
Which is why he is right about substantive due process, and if Roe had been decided on 9th Amendment grounds we wouldn't be revisiting this.
Oh sure we would, at least five current justices think there's no constitutional right to an abortion, and they'd find a way to explain it away.


They'd be more comfortable with stare decisis if Roe's foundation wasn't such a garbage fire.

I think the issue is that such a 9th Amendment finding would constrain the government in other areas that they'd rather not be.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 6:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar
See you in another life, brother
 Profile

Joined: Thu December 20, 2012 4:45 pm
Posts: 6635
Green Habit wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
The obvious retort to Thomas wanting to reconsider all those other cases decided on substantive due process grounds is that they can all be answered on Equal Protection Clause grounds instead. That's what O'Connor wanted to do this in Lawrence to try to justify joining the majority in Bowers.
Which is why he is right about substantive due process, and if Roe had been decided on 9th Amendment grounds we wouldn't be revisiting this.
Oh sure we would, at least five current justices think there's no constitutional right to an abortion, and they'd find a way to explain it away.

I interpreted the focus on due process as the Court saying that it didn't matter whether you use the original Roe rationale or the stronger due process/equal protection rationale that they were overturning it either way.

_________________
"I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 6:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Site Admin
 Profile

Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm
Posts: 6932
simple schoolboy wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
The obvious retort to Thomas wanting to reconsider all those other cases decided on substantive due process grounds is that they can all be answered on Equal Protection Clause grounds instead. That's what O'Connor wanted to do this in Lawrence to try to justify joining the majority in Bowers.
Which is why he is right about substantive due process, and if Roe had been decided on 9th Amendment grounds we wouldn't be revisiting this.
Oh sure we would, at least five current justices think there's no constitutional right to an abortion, and they'd find a way to explain it away.
They'd be more comfortable with stare decisis if Roe's foundation wasn't such a garbage fire.

I think the issue is that such a 9th Amendment finding would constrain the government in other areas that they'd rather not be.
The fact that they expanded the right to gun ownership one day before curtailing the right to an abortion makes it clear that they only want to find rights for some things but not others.

Which, in its essence, is fine! No one is consistent in saying what is and isn't constitutionally protected. Just be up front with the inconsistency.

4/5 wrote:
I interpreted the focus on due process as the Court saying that it didn't matter whether you use the original Roe rationale or the stronger due process/equal protection rationale that they were overturning it either way.
Yep.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 6:36 pm 
Offline
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 3:41 am
Posts: 5562
Green Habit wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
The obvious retort to Thomas wanting to reconsider all those other cases decided on substantive due process grounds is that they can all be answered on Equal Protection Clause grounds instead. That's what O'Connor wanted to do this in Lawrence to try to justify joining the majority in Bowers.
Which is why he is right about substantive due process, and if Roe had been decided on 9th Amendment grounds we wouldn't be revisiting this.
Oh sure we would, at least five current justices think there's no constitutional right to an abortion, and they'd find a way to explain it away.
They'd be more comfortable with stare decisis if Roe's foundation wasn't such a garbage fire.

I think the issue is that such a 9th Amendment finding would constrain the government in other areas that they'd rather not be.
The fact that they expanded the right to gun ownership one day before curtailing the right to an abortion makes it clear that they only want to find rights for some things but not others.

Which, in its essence, is fine! No one is consistent in saying what is and isn't constitutionally protected. Just be up front with the inconsistency.


How is it inconsistent to privilege enumerated rights over *whatever this is*? The 2nd is meaningless if bearing is only allowable as part of militia service.

Leaving issues to the states that the constitution is mute on is perfectly reasonable.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 6:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Looks Like a Cat
 Profile

Joined: Wed April 20, 2016 7:11 pm
Posts: 14138
simple schoolboy wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
The obvious retort to Thomas wanting to reconsider all those other cases decided on substantive due process grounds is that they can all be answered on Equal Protection Clause grounds instead. That's what O'Connor wanted to do this in Lawrence to try to justify joining the majority in Bowers.
Which is why he is right about substantive due process, and if Roe had been decided on 9th Amendment grounds we wouldn't be revisiting this.
Oh sure we would, at least five current justices think there's no constitutional right to an abortion, and they'd find a way to explain it away.
They'd be more comfortable with stare decisis if Roe's foundation wasn't such a garbage fire.

I think the issue is that such a 9th Amendment finding would constrain the government in other areas that they'd rather not be.
The fact that they expanded the right to gun ownership one day before curtailing the right to an abortion makes it clear that they only want to find rights for some things but not others.

Which, in its essence, is fine! No one is consistent in saying what is and isn't constitutionally protected. Just be up front with the inconsistency.


How is it inconsistent to privilege enumerated rights over *whatever this is*? The 2nd is meaningless if bearing is only allowable as part of militia service.

Leaving issues to the states that the constitution is mute on is perfectly reasonable.



I don't like it out of fear of how far a right-wing court could take it to win the culture war, but this seems like a justifiable position. They really should have gone with the Collins abortion bill a few weeks ago.

_________________
"The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 7:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Gone
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
Posts: 24014
Location: Illinois
Thank god Pearl Jam has weighed in

_________________
Dick/Balls


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 7:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The Master
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 4:18 am
Posts: 27936
Thank god verb has weighed in on Pearl Jam weighing in


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 10:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Mind Your Tanners
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 6:02 am
Posts: 9712
Location: Tristes Tropiques
The vibes are so bad today, probably just a matter of time before someone else tries to go Nick Roske mode.

_________________
VinylGuy wrote:
its really tiresome to see these ¨good guys¨ talking about any political stuff in tv while also being kinda funny and hip and cool....its just...please enough of this shit.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 10:52 pm 
Offline
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 3:41 am
Posts: 5562
Mickey wrote:
The vibes are so bad today, probably just a matter of time before someone else tries to go Nick Roske mode.


You've committed that dorks name to memory? Impressive.

Kavanagh's neighbors are probably all leaving town for the weekend.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 10:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Gone
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
Posts: 24014
Location: Illinois
Mickey wrote:
The vibes are so bad today, probably just a matter of time before someone else tries to go Nick Roske mode.


I’m pretty sure you hold the championship belt for RMers encouraging the murder of politicians

_________________
Dick/Balls


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 10:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Mind Your Tanners
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 6:02 am
Posts: 9712
Location: Tristes Tropiques
simple schoolboy wrote:
Mickey wrote:
The vibes are so bad today, probably just a matter of time before someone else tries to go Nick Roske mode.


You've committed that dorks name to memory? Impressive.

Kavanagh's neighbors are probably all leaving town for the weekend.


You ever hear of google, my man?

I've seen Alito, Kav, and Thomas's home addresses all over the timeline today. There's a palpable difference from even a few years ago.

_________________
VinylGuy wrote:
its really tiresome to see these ¨good guys¨ talking about any political stuff in tv while also being kinda funny and hip and cool....its just...please enough of this shit.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 11:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Gone
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
Posts: 24014
Location: Illinois
Mickey wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
Mickey wrote:
The vibes are so bad today, probably just a matter of time before someone else tries to go Nick Roske mode.


You've committed that dorks name to memory? Impressive.

Kavanagh's neighbors are probably all leaving town for the weekend.


You ever hear of google, my man?

I've seen Alito, Kav, and Thomas's home addresses all over the timeline today. There's a palpable difference from even a few years ago.


You seem to follow a bunch of level headed people on twitter

_________________
Dick/Balls


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 11:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Looks Like a Cat
 Profile

Joined: Wed April 20, 2016 7:11 pm
Posts: 14138
verb_to_trust wrote:
You seem to follow a bunch of level headed people on twitter



The next 7 days are going to show the nation a lot about it's character.

_________________
"The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 11:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Looks Like a Cat
 Profile

Joined: Wed April 20, 2016 7:11 pm
Posts: 14138
It'll be interesting to see if the lefties turn on RBG after this or it's still all-Trump all-the-time.

_________________
"The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 11:07 pm 
Offline
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 6:10 pm
Posts: 6950
From what I've seen both RBG and Obama are receiving a lot of criticism.

_________________
Nihilist lives don't matter


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 11:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Mind Your Tanners
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 6:02 am
Posts: 9712
Location: Tristes Tropiques
JuanHamm wrote:
From what I've seen both RBG and Obama are receiving a lot of criticism.


Yeah they're getting rightfully dragged, as far as I can tell. Again, things have shifted!

_________________
VinylGuy wrote:
its really tiresome to see these ¨good guys¨ talking about any political stuff in tv while also being kinda funny and hip and cool....its just...please enough of this shit.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 11:33 pm 
Offline
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 3:41 am
Posts: 5562
Should I hold out on a discount for one of those nifty RBG action figures or books?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri June 24, 2022 11:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar
"Supersonic sucks."
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 9:38 pm
Posts: 14997
JuanHamm wrote:
Isn't the real problem the United State's bizarre form of government? States rights vs federal power and all that...

I don't know, we have a similar system in Australia that generally works well.

The problem seems to be the perverse politicisation of the Supreme Court where its seen as a de facto policy maker, something that should instead only be the responsibility of the legislature.

I'm only a non-local idiot and haven't read the decision, but I thought it was pretty accepted that Roe was poorly decided and there was a degree of inevitability about its overturning at some point.

Isn't it possible to accept overturning Roe was the right decision but also support abortion rights and leaning on elected officials to remedy the gap in legal protections? I guess it's hard for me to understand the 'another example of the USA sliding into fascism!' reactions.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Sat June 25, 2022 12:24 am 
Offline
User avatar
Posting (live)
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Thu April 04, 2013 6:27 am
Posts: 17517
Location: Port Perry Lodge on voluptuous Lake Perry
Astute

_________________
3rd place, RM Power Rankings: Week Ending March 24, 2024


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Sat June 25, 2022 12:49 am 
Offline
User avatar
See you in another life, brother
 Profile

Joined: Thu December 20, 2012 4:45 pm
Posts: 6635
JuanHamm wrote:
From what I've seen both RBG and Obama are receiving a lot of criticism.

Why Obama?

_________________
"I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle



Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3819 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173 ... 191  Next

Board index » Word on the Street » News & Debate


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
It is currently Thu March 28, 2024 9:09 am