In that case, you know it’s only a matter of time before:
“I never thought the leopards would let my daughter die from an ectopic pregnancy,” says person who voted for the leopards-taking-away-reproductive-choice party.
(And they’ll blame Biden.)
In that case, you know it’s only a matter of time before:
“I never thought the leopards would let my daughter die from an ectopic pregnancy,” says person who voted for the leopards-taking-away-reproductive-choice party.
(And they’ll blame Biden.)
There shouldn’t be anything surprising about that situation.
Even before this week, Alabama doctors refused to treat any woman who showed signs of miscarriage, because they’re afraid of being implicated under Alabama’s harsh anti-abortion laws.
Just recently, an American vacationing in Malta–which has Europe’s strictest anti-abortion law–nearly died when she miscarried. She managed to fly to Spain for treatment before bleeding to death.
I also wonder if fertility clinics in these states will shut down, since the new laws will apparently require that all fetuses conceived via IVF must be carried to term. (Or, most likely, carried until they all die.)
Oh, absolutely. There is already a movement objecting to the “culling” of unused embryos. The entire fertility service will be at risk in those states.
The legal grounds for challenging this would be an arbitrary interference with a right to life that did not serve any compelling government interest. I expect suits on similar grounds against any law forbidding termination of a non-viable life threatening pregnancy.
There is no such general right to a specific medical procedure. The government needs only a rational reason to prohibit it, and that reason doesn’t even have to be factually sound. That’s why there is any regulation of drugs and medical procedures at all.
They just undercut their own 2020 case:
Supreme Court allows Louisiana to use congressional map that lower court said likely violates Voting Rights Act
This court has run amok.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
SCOTUS has a loophole.
DOI isn’t legally binding.
There was no Establishment Clause violation in Mr. Kennedy’s actions. From the Court:
“But in this case Mr. Kennedy’s private religious exercise did not come close to crossing any line one
might imagine separating protected private expression from impermissible government coercion.
Begin with the District’s own contemporaneous description of the facts. In its correspondence with Mr. Kennedy, the District never raised coercion concerns. To the contrary, the District conceded in a public 2015 document that there was “no evidence that students [were] directly coerced to pray with Kennedy.” App. 105. This is consistent with Mr. Kennedy’s account too. He has repeatedly stated that
he “never coerced, required, or asked any student to pray,”
and that he never “told any student that it was important that they participate in any religious activity.” Id., at 170.”
Yes, we know that the court claims that there was no Establishment Clause violation. The court is wrong, because quite plainly, there was. All that remains to be determined is whether they got this clear and obvious point wrong through incompetence, or through lies.
Do you really for one moment think that they would have reached the same decision if the praying coach were any religion other than Christian?
Probably no surprise here:
Full Title: Attorney General Ken Paxton says he will defend Texas sodomy law if Supreme Court revisits Lawrence vs. Texas
Justice Sotomayor noted in her dissent:
To the degree the court portrays petitioner Joseph Kennedy’s prayers as private and quiet, it misconstrues the facts. The record reveals that Kennedy had a long-standing practice of conducting demonstrative prayers on the 50-yard line of the football field. Kennedy consistently invited others to join his prayers and for years led student-athletes in prayer at the same time and location. The court ignores this history. The court also ignores the severe disruption to school events caused by Kennedy’s conduct.
And:
“The record before the Court bears this out. The District Court found, in the evidentiary record, that some students reported joining Kennedy’s prayer because they felt social pressure to follow their coach and teammates,” she wrote. “Kennedy told the District that he began his prayers alone and that players followed each other over time until a majority of the team joined him, an evolution showing coercive pressure at work.” SOURCE
IIRC Sotomayor even included photos of the prayer sessions in her dissent which, I have read (somewhere), is almost unheard of.
More paternalistic bullshit when it comes to tribal rights. If the state starts stepping in it will lead to head-butting between state and federal prosecutors about whose turf a crime belongs to, and the fed is likely to just take a hands off stance after awhile. That’s not going to be good news for Indian folk, who have worked long and hard to obtain their sovereignty.
The reason, of course, is because Ginsburg was replaced by Barrett so the 5-4 went the other way. I am sure Barrett would have ruled for Oklahoma in McGirt v. Oklahama.
And here….we….go: Supreme Court to decide on state legislators power over election.
We’re so fucked.
As a middle-aged white guy I will probably be fine but this country is really screwed.
Also Supreme Court: Let’s just forget about climate change too, ok?
I would say “to have their sovereignty recognized by the USA,” as otherwise, what’s to stop, say, the South from obtaining sovereignty?