OK, my abandoned home state of South Dakota has wasted no time in taking advantage of the Supreme Court’s rightward shift and has proposed a ban to nearly all abortion. What happens now? Somebody challenges it, works their way up through the judicial system, and then the evangelicals get to find out whether all that money they pumped into Team Bush actually pays off?
The law will certainly be overturned in a federal court. Then, if the AG or whoever in SD decides to appeal, it’ll work it’s way up thru the judicial system, but the SCOTUS may decide to not even hear the case. That’s what I think will happen. And that’ll be unfortunate since we won’t get to see who is willing to overturn Roe.
Keep in mind that we already know there are 5 votes to uphold Roe, so this court isn’t going to overturn it. I strongly suspect Roberts would uphold Roe, but I’m not sure about Alito. Thomas and Scalia almost certainly would overturn it.
This was obviously passed with the express intent of being a test case. When Roe v. Wade is reaffirmed by this case I think the abortion debate will settle down because this is the best chance since the 1960s to have it overturned and I think people realize that, so when this court affirms it it will be definitively settled for a long time to come.
Assuming that humans are rational actors, Doors. That’s a Great Debate and a half, in itself.
Incidentally, I am aware that Roe was decided in 1973, I’m just suggesting that at no point since that decision was there any chance that it would be overturned.
Actually, it would be crazy to assume that once Roe is re-affirmed that the anti-abortion crowd will quietly accept that outcome and stop pressing to make abortion illegal. This fight is never going to end.
If Stevens is replaced by a Bush (or his succeesor) appointee, then they will have an even better chance of having Roe repealed.
While I hardly think that the current SCOTUS reaffirming Roe will put any sort of end to the abortion debate, I think that the S. Dakota legislature is doing the pro-life cause more harm then good here. If the case does make it to the SCOTUS, they will just reaffirm Roe, and create another pro-life precedent. Had they waited till another pro-choice justice was replaced, they would’ve had a better chance of not having their law repealed. As politicians often do, though, they went for the short term benefit of scoring political points by declaring themselves in favor of a antiabortion law.
Be interesting to see what the political fall out from Roberts voting to uphold Roe would be. Literally millions of people worked to have Bush elected for almost the sole reason of having him put anti-Roe votes on the court. Might put a damper on the 2008 Repub chances if one of his justices decided against the S. Dakota law.
I doubt it. What are the anti-abortion folks going to do, vote Democrat?
I have no doubt that both Roberts and Alito will allow more restrictions on abortion than O’Conner would. They may even vote to uphold the ban on so-called partial birth abortions. Still, I’d be pretty surprised if Roberts would overturn *Roe *just for the heck of it. I think he’d look at the arguments and base his decision on that. And it would have to be one hell of an argument that would convince him to overturn Roe. I’ll admit that’s just my gut feel from listening to his confimation hearings, though. I can’t prove it.
They just won’t vote as much. When you consider how close the past two presidential elections have been, that easily could tip the balance.
As people have pointed out elsewhere on the boards, actually overturning Roe vrs Wade would likely be a political disaster for the Republicans. I wouldn’t be surprised if these people want their law to be overturned.
Not vote, or vote for some extremist third party to make a point, like Nader on the left.
That’s possible, but not likely. Besides, there’s still the issue of SSM to bring out the religious vote. 
Not thinking so much of how they’d vote, as how much effort they’d put into campaigning, raising money, etc. I agree they’d probably still vote for whomever the Repub is, but I’m not sure they’d give as much support knowing that the best they can hope for is to stiffin some regulations on abortions in a couple of states.
I predict if the prolifer crowd is frustrated by Roberts during this election cycle, the extremist Christian Right “Constitution Party” that ran a presidential candidate in 2004 will get a surge of support. Their single-issue voters will be lost to the Republicans.
If Roe is actually overturned, many of those who went Republican for other reasons, like security or economics, will probably not go Democrat but start organizing in the Republican primaries to purge the party of its religious nuts. I would expect the Democrats to pick up plenty of votes just the same. Probably a lot.
If either Roberts or Alito vote to overturn RvW, the Democrats will filibuster any further Supreme Court nominees.
Regards,
Shodan
There are many, many, MANY times I would have voted Democratic, if they had only changed a single plank in their platform. I am a Republican by definition as a result. So, yeah, you’re right.
Actually it would HELP Republican chances. Who are the religious right zealots going to vote for if not a Rep? Plus, the Republicans that the Demos were wrong about the scare tactic of Republican President = Roe v. Wade overturned.
Samuel Alito heads up the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Doesn’t that mean he gets the say-so on whether or not the court will take the case? That could be some deafening silence.
He does? Your cite does not even mention Alito’s name, btw. I don’t know this for sure, but I seriously doubt that SCOTUS justices determine which cases the lower courts decide to take.
Here’s the Wiki page on SCOTUS. Doesn’t this mean that Alito will be the one who decides whether or not SCOTUS will hear the case (if it got that far)?
No. The justices vote on whether or not th hear the case. From your link, it takes a vote of 4 to hear a case:
Emphasis added.