As expected, the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which stood for half a century as a guarantee of women’s reproductive rights. About half or more states have already passed or are about to pass laws banning abortions, even for women who were victims of rape or incest, even for women whose life is in danger. The “right to life” so prized by anti-abortion activists does not include the life of the woman.
As was not quite so expected, the Supreme Court gutted the Miranda rights of people who are arrested. Police may fail to tell prisoners of their legal rights, including their right to remain silent.
The Trump Court is remaking and redefining the law in a radical way. There is nothing “conservative” about their willingness to toss out precedent. There is something very radical about the jackhammer they are using to change social and legal norms.
Women will die because of the Court’s decision to throw out Roe, which several of them pledged in public not to do. The old coat hanger routine and the unlicensed abortionists will return. Women who can afford to flee to a state where abortion is available will do so. Those who can self-medicate with Internet anti-abortion drugs will do so, although some states are trying to ban Internet abortion drugs (will they open every package to every woman of child-bearing age?).
The Court’s decision on New York’s gun law is terrifying. Be prepared to see armed men (and women, don’t forget Congresswoman Lauren Bobert) strolling through your neighborhood or shopping malls. If the six justices actually think that open carry is a fine idea, why won’t they permit it in their own courtroom?
Make no mistake: the current majority on the Supreme Court is not conservative; it is radical, in its reckless disregard for precedent and the safety of citizens.
The Court is not libertarian; its decisions require millions of people to abide by their cramped view of the way things ought to be. The state must fund religious schools, no matter how bigoted and discriminatory they are, if the state funds any private schools. States and cities must not protect their public by enacting laws that prevent them from openly carrying a deadly weapon.
We can expect even more intrusive decisions, valuing property rights over human rights, corporate rights over workers’ rights.
We will be living with this narrow-minded, bossy, intrusive Court for many years. My generation has failed. I look to the enlightened young people, the product of America’s much-maligned public schools, to reverse course in the future and preserve this fragile experiment in democracy from the ideologues who seek to destroy it.
For an insightful assessment of how the Supreme Court’s decision on abortion will affect women in Texas, read this article in The Texas Monthly.
An excerpt:
An excerpt: As trigger laws go into effect around the country, Texans seeking surgical abortions will likely find themselves in either Kansas or New Mexico, the two nearest states where the procedure will remain legal—though both have a limited number of clinics, which is likely to make scheduling an appointment difficult. Kansas has four clinics, which currently serve 530,000 potential patients of reproductive age. Now the state’s clinics will be the nearest alternative for 7.7 million such patients, according to theGuttmacher Institute, a nonprofit group that researches reproductive health. New Mexico, which has seven clinics, will be the nearest option for 1.9 million potential patients, the vast majority of whom will be Texans.
What about abortion pills?
Medication abortions, which are nonsurgical and administered by taking a two-dose regimen of pills that terminate a pregnancy, are currently illegal in Texas after the seventh week of pregnancy; after HB 1280 goes into effect on July 24, medication abortions, which are currently the most common type of abortions in Texas, are included in the total ban on the procedure in the state.
As of last December, Texas law also forbids the shipment of pills that induce an abortion “by courier, delivery, or mail service.” It’s unclear how Texas officials plan to enforce this law, as many U.S. and international organizations offer the pills by mail, or whether those who seek care after a self-administered abortion could face criminal charges under HB 1280, depending on how the law is applied.
Legislators see the Supreme Court ruling as a green light to outlaw abortion and criminalize anyone who performs one. The penalties are as stiff as murder.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Now that women can be criminalized not only for an abortion, but for a miscarriage, what makes our democracy any less of a theocracy than the Iranian government our right-wingers profess to despise, or our majority Supreme Court justices other than ayatollahs in black evangelist robes?
Well stated. Each person who steps into an-anti-abortion church on Sunday is complicit.
Years ago, Ronald Reagan referred to those fighting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan as “freedom fighters” and “good, God-fearing people, just like us.” He was referring, ofc, to the Taliban.
Ofc, the Russians had no right to be in Afghanistan, as they have no right to be in Ukraine today, but yes, I thought way back then, there really is no difference in worldview between Reagan and the Taliban.
Reading, now, the final version of Mullah Alito’s decree.
Agree!
Sickening ruling.
This can be changed.
It’s pretty sad that CJINO* John Roberts has now abandoned any effort to preserve the credibility of the Court and has instead taken up the task of licking Alito’s boots.
Chief Justice In Name Only
The John Roberts Pledge
I pledge to Alito
To lick his boots
And never to veto
His righteous suits
Roberts Bootlicking
What’s that smudge
Upon your suit?
Just some sludge
From Sammy’s boot
Now, today, if I can alter my handle (not good w/these things), I will follow your lead, SDHP, & add “hysterical” to it.
The sneak-in repeal of Miranda Rights is just TOO much.
What’s going on is that SCotUS is throwing EVERYTHING @ We, the People, thinking (well, they DON’T think, have 🧠 s) that we won’t notice. I want to get out on the streets as much as for protesting the repeal of Miranda as I do insofar as Roe v. Wade. AND they’re doing this in the midst of the 1/6 Hearings (the open carry 💩, too). Did they think that we’re so distracted by the insurrection that they’ll just keep repeating our rights?
VOTE the rotten Republicans (& the DINOs–primaries) OUT. & go volunteer to work at polling places:
Be election judges & poll watchers. If we don’t get it done at these elections (& KNOW your candidates in local/state judicial races: these judicial races are CRUCIAL), then we truly are toast.)
Sorry, I didn’t mean to increase work for others with the extra letter.
You can just address me as “HP” (Hysterical Poet) if you want.
I think. My handle has always been confusing, at any rate.
Some address me as SDP, others as SomeDAM, others as Poet and at least one as “Right wing troll”
John Roberts Pledge: picks up all the messy dust of Democracy so you can flush it down the toilet efficiently.
It’s a Scalia/Thomas Court. The rest of us be damned.
yup
I thought Scalia was dead.
And I didn’t think Thomas was capable of leading a hose to water.
(Horse works too)
Scalia/Alito, Potato/Potahtoh
Randian slip.
If I had to give today a title, it would be Thomas Unleashed. The texts of his guns decision and his concurring opinion should give no doubt that he and his wife feel like they are riding as high as they ever have and have higher to go.
Basically, many parts of the Constitution have become moot and it will take a new Court and likely a new generation if we are ever to get back to where we were yesterday. But of all the bad news this week, the most ominous may be found in the final sentence of his concurring opinion to overturn Roe: “Substantive due process conflicts with that textual command and has harmed our country in many ways. Accordingly, we should eliminate it from our jurisprudence at the earliest opportunity.”
I won’t get into what substantive due process is here, I’m sure Wikipedia has a succinct description. But this would basically knock the rest out of what little is left of the Constitution. For the right, it is a tool to be used for power. For the rest of us, it is the last connection many of us have had to governing.
“Substantive due process conflicts with that textual command and has harmed our country in many ways.”
This could serve as a DEFINITION of fascism.
Probably the best approach at this point is just to let individual states vie for businesses and residents.
If Texas wants to ban abortion, let them. But also let them know that many of us outside of Texas will no longer buy their products , services or oil and gas.* Nor will we visit their state or otherwise do business with them.
(I’d be willing to pay a significantly higher price at the pump.)
Make these states PAY in a very real way for their decisions.
It’s the people of the state who elect the politicians and hence it is the people who are responsible for the decisions the politicians make.
This is the ultimate goal of American fascism. To stratify certain elements of society into enclaves to limit their political effectiveness while using them as examples of State tolerance (see China). In early Third Reich Germany, the period from the Reichstag fire to the May 10 book burning are generally agreed upon as the high point of Gleichschaltung, the period of alignment of party platform with governing and social life. But there is a less well understood trend of Selbstgleichschaltung, which is akin to self-censorship, i.e., accommodating to the policy pre- until post-facto without overt government coercion, thereby avoiding the worst tendencies of repression.
Under American fascism, each category of individual will have a Las Vegas-style “safe and tolerant” community. New Orleans will become party central. Atlanta and New Orleans will be designated for Black events. P-town in Rhode Island, San Francisco, New York and other cities will have safe spaces for LGBTQ, but they’re on their own everywhere else, where they will have to accommodate. There will be no need to codify restrictive real estate, it will be self evident and enforced by the local owners.
And since taxes will be low to non-existent, gated communities will become the norm for the ruling, mostly white and male-dominated. They will live by Steve Bannon’s maxim of how he describes his “movement” by declaring “We are inclusive nationalism and participatory populism.” Some minorities and exceptions will be allowed to join, as long as they acquiesce on real power. Each will pay according to what they can raise. Poor communities will remain and get poorer. Wealthy communities will remain and only experience brown skin after being in the sun too long.
Texas is almost certainly going to ban almost all abortions.
And we in other states can not force them to do otherwise, since the legal option is now effectively dead.
So, we in other states can simply sit back and do nothing or we can make their decision hurt economically.
What other alternative is there?
Personally, I won’t buy any product from Texas or visit the state at this point.
But others are free to do as they please, of course.
Maybe if companies like Google and Tesla threaten to leave, someone in the governor’s office will take note.
And even if the companies themselves don’t leave, I can’t see any way that their engineers and scientists are going to wish to stay there.
I doubt Texas officials have really considered the possible ramifications.
Poet,
Nan Whaley, an Ohio politician, agrees with you. She says Ohio will lose residents and businesses will suffer.
Unfortunately, the cost of living in blue states makes it harder for red state liberals to move to them.
I’ll hope that the religio misogynists find their churches emptied of women and the men who care about them.
Quoting Greg’s comment- “Some minorities will be allowed as long as they acquiesce to real power”- a number of the acquiescers are commenters at this blog and they include the liberal minority within conservative churches.
My title for this whole week is Minority Report.
That would actually blow the tiny minds of the cult. The word “Minority” and trying to figure out what it means would cause them to implode into dust.
Greg, LCT, hilarious (and horrifying at the same time)
Texas women are already going to Mexico as well as New Mexico to access an abortion. This trend will continue with more and more women of means going across the state and federal borders. Poor women are those that will suffer the most, and many will die from self-induced abortions.
Their deaths are on the heads of those who make anti-abortion churches possible. The Catholic Church is a rogue church divorced from the Bible’s scripture.
The Catholic Church has always been rogue.
From the Crusades to Priest pedophilia, rogue has been it’s middle name.
The Catholic Rogue Church.
And even before that. It was BORN IN an attempt to quell dissent and spent its first few hundred years chasing down and murdering heretics.
The Rogue to Hell
The Rogue to Hell
Is paved with prayer
And you can tell
That Pope is there
“Rogue to hell”- most clever. You should write for an amazing politician like AOC.
Yes, retired, as always, the poor will suffer the most, & from the repeal of Miranda, as well.
Let’s fill up those jails…w/poor people (only).
It’s the ALEC (Koch) way.
It strikes me, too, that our pride in the brave and the few who stood up to Trump and saved the election results, good as these people are, masks the fact that they couldn’t prevent a GOP hijacking of our country. The coup was a complete success, at Supreme Court level.
The country was hijacked by the axis of conservative Catholics and evangelicals, in that order.
It’s tragic that the Catholic church’s right wing politicking
was covered up by media and public influencers. That silence reflected, in part, the fear of tribalists’ responses.
As bad as it is on its own, Alito’s Dobbs decision is FAR WORSE, even, than it initially appears to be, for it is a template for eliminating a whole body of what are called in the law “unenumerated rights.” The decision from this Extreme Court is revolutionary and was meant to be. It’s the ground-breaking document for a new, fascist version of the United States. I’m not exaggerating. I wish I were. The extreme right-wing has been waiting for this for a long, long time.
the long game began with Scalia’s appointment
yup
I’m nearly 60 years old. There are three times in my life that I woke up with an absolute gut punch to the psyche. One was 9/11. The second was when the 45 was elected. The third was today. I told my two young adult sons, elections matter. Don’t ever forget it.
Agree
yes!!!
ABSOFRIGGINLUTELY, Oakland Mom.
& please see my comments above. Not only must EVERYONE VOTE, but people need to work at the polls, something made VERY clear at the 1/6 Hearings. Honest Election judges & poll watchers
needed at EVERY polling place, in EVERY town, village, city and state. Sign up NOW.
Voters in Texas and other red states need to mobilize and make it clear that they will not tolerate draconian abortion bans.
YES!!!!
I could be wrong, but I am very hopeful that there are a significant number of Republicans in Texas and other states who will not support these total bans.
Coupled with TX’s stupid (well, non-existent) gun laws.
Beto was on Stephen Colbert yesterday.
Do you think he has a chance, Diane, what w/Uvalde & now this?
The good ‘ole boy network does not fight fair. Right wing Texans have refused to rent space to Beto to hold a meeting or rally. They have done everything they can to marginalize him and his campaign. Beto should move a couple of miles to the north, and he would be given a fair shot in New Mexico.
Bento’s polls got better after Uvalde.
A 5-point gap now.
It all comes down to turnout.
Thanks, Diane. That sounds hopeful! Texans: GOTV!!!
Vote as if your life depends on it…
because it DOES.
I’m not proud to confess this, but I hadn’t realized a challenge to Miranda was on the docket. How did this nonsense receive certiorari? Private prison investors and proprietors must be delighted by this news….
mark: I don’t think you’re the only one.
In fact, I think the majority of people didn’t know this (I’m involved w/criminal justice issues on a state level, & no one I’ve spoken to has said one word about a possible Miranda repeal–& these are experts. It was the dirtiest of sneak-ins, proving we have to become Docket Detectives, or risk even more bad actions.
SCotUS is making us a 🍌 republic.
See my comment below — this case was about whether the failure to give a Miranda warning is itself a constitutional violation that gives raise to a civil cause of action. Police still must give Miranda warnings, and the failure to do so will result in evidence being tossed out.
Fair enough, FLERP! If I were a betting man, I would wager that one place where this court will respect precedent is in its own decisions. So what happens the next time a challenge to Miranda comes before it?
I don’t know of any specific challenges to Miranda v. Arizona right now, but I would not be surprised to see, at a minimum, Justice Thomas vote to overturn that decision.
My wife had just finished pointing out that the Native American knows what to do and how to avoid notice. Remember how suddenly, there were casinos?
The Casinos would be ideally suited, since they would have the money to hire highly qualified doctors and nurses.
And if the abortion was done at the Casino, the Casino would be able to keep the process discrete and could even claim the doctors were simply on site for emergencies among gamblers.
Presumably, if it is on native land , it is off limits to state or even federal inspection.
The casino could also offer free transportation which would eliminate the possibility that tbe person giving the abortion patient might be sued under the current fascist Texas law.
The person giving the patient a ride
It may not be that easy. Remember Hillsdale got footing in tribal education (the Tribe sponsored Hillsdale’s curriculum at a charter school). About 20% of native Americans are Catholic.
Remember this
Money trump’s religion. In fact, most religions are basically businesses focused on generating dollars.
If there is a dollar to be made, you can bet your painted pony that Casinos will take advantage of it.
They can advertise a twofer: “gamble and get a free abortion”. Or “abort and get free gambling chips.”
.
Question- Hatred for women (or, a desire to corral them) trumps money in the view of patriarchal churches, regardless of which ethnic/racial group we’re talking about?
“I’m going to go back to bed, pull the covers over my eyes, and weep for our loss of freedom.”
–My mother, minutes ago, by text
How wonderful that you still have your mother. Mine would be 104 this fall.
Indeed. She’s a treasure, this woman. She texts me about politics all the time. She never uses trump’s name, just a POS emoji.
Sorry about your loss, Roy!
The 6 activist theocrats masquerading as SCOTUS judges are but the tip of the spear in the broad based assault on the separation of church and state, this in direct opposition to the founding fathers obvious intent to make that idea part of the foundational values and laws of this nation. This hypocrisy gives the lie to any claims of originalism being a guiding principle of those judges and of the idea of originalism itself. When Fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross. Fascism is now here.
The Koch network and the American Catholic Church want the same thing- a repeat of the Great Hunger in Ireland when 1,000,000 Irish died of starvation. In ever age, in every country, the priest aligns with the despot- Jefferson’s warning.
Just to be clear on the Miranda point, today’s decision doesn’t say that police no longer need to give Miranda warnings. It says that a failure to give a Miranda warning is not itself a 5th amendment violation that can be the basis for a civil lawsuit for damages. In other words, the remedy for a failure to Mirandize is the exclusion of evidence obtained following that failure, not a civil lawsuit for damages.
This is a legal distinction without a difference. This is not about theory, it is about de facto events. The fact is that with this ruling, the burden of proof has been shifted completely from the accuser to the accused. The point IS that police no longer need to give Miranda warnings because any excuse they pull out of their collective asses will be valid as long as a judge agrees. And under the new constitutional law, judges will no longer be bound by precedent. So yes, Miranda is dead.
No, it’s a crucial distinction with a huge difference, and Miranda is not dead. We know this because a defense attorney can file, and win, /a motion to exclude a confession obtained in an interrogation where the defendant was not Mirandized.
It eviscerates the intent of Miranda by placing the burden on the accused. What you describe–attorney file, etc.–is exactly the opposite of a right. You are arguing for replacing a right with an administrative procedure.
Eh, you can characterize it that way if you like. I’m sure the dissents make compelling arguments for why the decision is bad. I haven’t thought it through deeply or even read the opinions, but my initial instinct is that it is bad. But the Miranda rule itself is not dead. Miranda held that the prosecution cannot introduce evidence in a criminal trial where the defendant has not been apprised of his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. This is not a minor point about mere procedure. This is the heart of the Miranda rule and the rights of criminal defendants.
That’s the only point I’m making. Diane’s post might lead one to conclude that Miranda warnings are a thing of the past, and that Miranda v. Arizona has been overturned. That would not be correct.
“Miranda held that the prosecution cannot introduce evidence in a criminal trial where the defendant has not been apprised of his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.” You wrote that. Not me. The Vega decision explicitly allows law enforcement (time to invent) countless reasons to override this right. I was going to cite a number of easily found logical errors in the decision, but there were just too many in the first five pages. Justice Hagen again clearly lays out the disingenuous nature of the decision in her dissent. Again, this is about using the law to expand a certain power of the State and give the actors of the state as much leeway as possible at the expense of individual rights:
“Today, the Court strips individuals of the ability to seek a remedy for violations of the right recognized in Miranda. The majority observes that defendants may still seek ‘the suppression at trial of statements obtained’ in violation of Miranda’s procedures. But sometimes, such a statement will not be suppressed. And sometimes, as a result, a defendant will be wrongly convicted and spend years in prison. He may succeed, on appeal or in habeas, in getting the conviction reversed. But then, what remedy does he have for all the harm he has suffered? The point of § 1983 is to provide such redress—because a remedy ‘is a vital component of any scheme for vindicating cherished constitutional guarantees.’ The majority here, as elsewhere, injures the right by denying the remedy.”
Not to beat a dead horse, but just to be absolutely clear, the Vega decision does not allow law enforcement (or, more properly, prosecuting attorneys) to override a criminal defendant’s right to exclude trial evidence obtained through an un-Mirandized interrogation.
What Vega does is eliminate an enforcement mechanism that has, up to now, given law enforcement incentives to Mirandize criminal suspects. Or, to flip it, it will incentivize law enforcement to not provide Miranda warnings. That’s bad. I think we’re saying the same thing on that front.
I’ll take a look at Kagan’s dissent this weekend. (Famous last words.)
Incidentally, I noticed that the Biden Administration submitted a brief in this case arguing in favor of the position taken in the majority opinion. So this case was a win for Garland’s DOJ.
Confessions given under duress without Miranda rights will be used as evidence in court. Scotusblog said the justices on this case had awkward moments of silence, kind of looking around at each other, thinking, Are we really going to actually do this?
“Confessions given under duress without Miranda rights will be used as evidence in court.”
LCT, why do you say this?
In this case, Vega forced a confession at gunpoint with threats of deportation, the confession was admitted as evidence, and the ruling is that Vega is not liable, even though he tried to conceal the truth about the confession. I ask, as an example, if an officer is not liable for murder, what stops him or her from shooting innocent people? If an officer can get away with violating the 5th Amendment, what stops him or her from doing it?
Ok, I understand. But just to be clear, that doesn’t show that “confessions given under duress without Miranda rights will be used as evidence in court” because of the Vega decision. As you say, that was already happening prior to Vega. If a court finds that evidence was procured from an an-mirandized interrogation, that evidence will be barred. If an appellate court finds that, in a trial resulting in a conviction, such evidence was admitted and was not harmless error, the defendant’s conviction will be overturned. All this was true before Vega and it remains true.
But I do agree that the removal of incentives to Mirandize will likely result in more failures to Mirandize.
As I was watering the garden, my wife said, “Well, they did it. They overturned Roe v. Wade. Gut punch to the stomach. She left for work in tears. I remember when I taught American Government, I told the kids, “You will see Roe v. Wade in the headlines a lot and I want you to know what it means.” I taught at-risk youth for most of my life. They said, “Charvet, why do you have all those books on your desk?” It’s called “cross referencing to see “what is what”. I asked them to look up the Landmark Supreme Court Case, Roe v. Wade in their textbooks. “Charvet I can’t find it.” Another student said, “Charvet I can’t find it.” I said, “Then you are looking hard enough, dang it. This is an American Government text book and it has to be there!” I knew darn well that it wasn’t. We went back to my other books and found the case. We discussed it and the importance of thinking critically. I said, “Let’s not focus on the abortion part, but more of the part about a “woman’s right to choose; a woman’s right to privacy.” The kids said, “What about God?” I said, “This is about law and the person’s right to make their own decision no matter how one might deem it terrible, it’s that person’s choice.” And, by the way, if I do not believe in God, so what then?” There were many more discussion on that topic, but I remember vividly stating, “What’s next? Because we are the law (Supreme Court) of the land and we don’t like purple, now anyone caught wearing purple is arrested? We discussed precedent and how it “sets up” the next move. But more importantly, why was Roe v. Wade not in the textbook? Not a mention of this state approved text. Why? I tried to follow the money trail, the publisher, and so on…but then I just decided to make sure my students could think and vote. Anyone in my class was registered to vote. I did what I could, but as George Carlin would say, “The cards are stacked against you. You are not part of the club. And anyone who believes in the American Dream has to be asleep to believe it.” In the movie Network he yelled, “I am mad as hell and can’t take it anymore!”
At this juncture, it’s worth all of us considering what we can do to dry up the flow of patients to Catholic hospitals (1 in 6 of U.S. hospitals) and to dry up students to Catholic and evangelical schools, K-12 through university. SCOTUS decisions based on religion show us the future of American principles are jeopardized. Taxpayers have already made Catholic organizations the U.S.’ 3rd largest employer.
While there are many issues like a woman’s life in issues of abortion there is also example in some Catholic schools that alter the U.S. pledge of allegiance to include an anti-abortion covenant.
After reviewing Ilya Shapirio’s damning tweet which identified his male choice for SCOTUS and disparaged Black women, Georgetown Catholic University did not fire the Koch Network’s former employee, Shapiro, from his position in top management at its law school. (Shapiro resigned June 6.)
The PEN organization advanced a defense of Shapiro that attempted to try on a different interpretation of the tweet- a reach by their own admission. And, while the Shapiro tweet was seen widely (full media coverage), PEN’s spin questioned the “significant negative impact,” cited in Georgetown’s review. PEN has contact info at its site for reader input. PEN’s opinion piece is available on line with key words, Ilya Shapiro PEN, freedom of speech.
The response is the ballot box, and candidates require funding, after expressing your anger on Facebook donate to a candidate of your choice and/or the Democratic National Committee. Your contribution multiplied by thousands of contributors will determine election outcomes. Anger without REAL support is useless, contribute, volunteer, lets take back the nation
Fewer patients selecting conservative religious hospitals (at a minimum 1 in 6 U.S. hospitals) and lower enrollments at conservative religious schools would also send a message.
The former is harder to do because of people’s individual insurance restrictions. The latter is too lucrative to pass up when state legislatures are doing all they can to send money that benefits my child.
Harder for some but, Medicare expands the choices.
I wouldn’t send my kids to Catholic schools (1) to be indoctrinated in bizarre beliefs, no matter how much of a reward also, the blood fetish is a real turn-off (2) where racial and single sex segregation happens and (3) where teachers have no civil rights and (4) where I have no voice at school board meetings with elected officials (Michelle Obama’s brother learned that the hard way at the private school where his kids attended).
AOC- “Sand in every gear”
That’s what Biden advised, activism. He urged people to support candidates that believe in a woman’s right to choose in the midterms. He implored the American public to vote for candidates that seek to codify Roe V. Wade into law. He urged the public to protest peacefully. Anger won’t solve the problem. Biden called the Supreme Court ruling extremism in a country where roughly 65 to 70% of the people believe in a woman’s right to choose.
The Democrats had over 50 years to codify Roe into law – where have they been? They have even had multiple opportunities with filibuster-proof supermajorities. But now that they let it be overturned on their watch without codifying it, we’re supposed to believe that if we give them a lot of money, they’ll somehow codify it now?
Just how long do people have to be duped before they realize they’re being duped?
If you’re interested in a more productive use of your money, donate to local abortion clinics and mutual aid funds to help women in red states get to places where abortion is available.
Re “The Court’s decision on New York’s gun law is terrifying. Be prepared to see armed men (and women, don’t forget Congresswoman Lauren Bobert) strolling through your neighborhood or shopping malls.”
I can hardly wait until someone in a “stand your ground” state see one of these open carry idiots, and “feeling afraid” opens fire on them. (Cue the Spaghetti Western theme music.)
I’ve done it before and I will do it again.
When I have seen someone carrying a gun in public I call 911 or find a nearby police officer. I would rather wrong than shot or dead.
As things change in New York I will probably involuntarily point out a gun carrier and shout “man with a gun” because it frightens me so. It is instinctual for me to act this way when I see a gun in public. The ammosexuals can strut around all they want, but it won’t be comfortable for them.
Excellent point- ammosexuals and religio misogynists
That’s a creative strategy.
If the gun packers get approached by police enough times (and maybe even frisked and cuffed), maybe they will just decide to leave the gun at home.
I’m not sure I would shout out man with a gun though. Some of these folks might shoot.
Point taken. Calling 911 and telling them a man with a gun is acting strangely…yeah.
That should do it.
Just tell 911 that there’s a guy with a gun and he’s acting “erratic” and making people nervous.
I get it, but seriously, do not call 911 unless there is a real emergency, folks.
Someone openly carrying a gun in front of my apartment is an emergency in my book.
I think if we learned anything from the Rittenhouse verdict it is that in a standoff between gun holders,” he who shoots first wins”.
Another satirical Ravitchism bites the dust! Diane jests that the “originalist” SCOTUS should logically dismiss all female Justices since the founders surely would have deemed their engagement within the public sphere repugnant. Well folks, today’s atavistic RepubliQan court takes us one step closer to the death of parody. The Onion’s days are numbered. To quote John Lennon: “Strange days indeed, most peculiar mama”.
What happened to the right to life, the pursuit of happiness and liberty? Abortion cuts off a person’s right to life. If you question this then you need to look at the many preterm babies who have survived and flourished. I have one of those. He was born 27 years ago at 24-25 weeks gestation. He has no abnormalities or defects. He is a working member of our population. There are babies who have survived abortions. Killing them after birth is infanticide. These babies are tiny humans. All deserve a chance at life. Considering how much greater out ability to see a unborn baby has become, we can no longer deny that it is in fact a baby. In addition mothers no longer suffer from the social consequences of unwed motherhood. Having a child or being pregnant no longer Carrie’s with it the loss of employment or status. Most red states allow for abortions in the case of incest, rape or extreme. Maternal or fetal health issues. But killing a baby for the wrong sex or inconvenience to the mother or father is abhorrent.
Whatever it is you mean to say here, your cause would benefit from your acquiring a working knowledge of syntax, grammar, and semantics in the English sentence. For starters: a complete declarative sentences contains a subject and predicate, and said predicate must contain a verb.
firstgrademonkey,
You were absolutely right not to have an abortion.
That was your choice.
Women who do want an abortion should also have their choice.
Do you think you should be able to tell them what to do?
The Supreme Court does.
The Attorney General of Texas Ken Paxton just sent all his employees home for a holiday to celebrate the total ban on abortions in Texas–even women who have been raped, who are the victims of incest, or whose lives are at risk, cannot get an abortion. It is criminal.
Does that seem right?
Do you think women really want to kill their babies?
Well, if you got your own twisted baggage, then maybe.
If you don’t want an abortion, don’t get one.
You do realize that very, very few abortions happen post-viability, right? And of those very, very few, nearly all a result of fetal abnormalities?
P.S. How does an exception for rape work? Does the mother just claim she was raped? Does she have to prove it somehow? If so, what is that procedure? Or is she only eligible for abortion based on rape if her rapist has been convicted in court, by which time her “fetus” is probably a preschooler?
I’ve already read that some red states are working on or have already passed legislation like this:
“US states could ban people from traveling for abortions, experts warn
“If supreme court weakens Roe v Wade, some states will take aim at people seeking procedures and medications out of state”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/03/us-abortions-travel-wave-of-restrictions
If a woman in one of those red states wants an abortion, they may have to move permanently into a blue state to avoid the risk of pinion time.
Some of those Red states are also trying to ban abortion medicine bought over the Internet and delivered by mail.
Will they create an abortion surveillance state to monitor the mails?
The fear of prosecution may be enough to keep companies from shipping to such states.
Well, if Texas officials start opening US mail, they might find themselves in a bit of hot water.
And if the abortion pills are sent by US mail, how could the state of Texas prove as much without opening the mail?
I think this is going to be extremely difficult to enforce and all it takes is one pharmaceutical company will to take the risk if they see a big monetary return. Many pharmaceutical companies are actually outside the US so it’s not even clear how the state of Texas could prosecute them, even if they wanted to.
Also, it would/ will be impossible to monitor every package and every trunk or every car coming into the state of Texas for contraband abortion pills which can easily be hidden (even disguised as aspirin).
Texas state officials are just kidding themselves if they think they can prevent abortion pills from reaching those who desire them.
It’s also not clear if states have the authority to ban a federally approved medication. (Federal law preemption is the issue.)
There’s a case in Mississippi that is pending that will have to address this question to some extent.
Click to access gov.uscourts.mssd.109735.1.0_3.pdf
Biden pledged in his speech today to keep medications coming in the mails.
Not to mention the fact that his will create a HUGE underground market. The drug cartels must be grateful for the Dobbs decision.
You are right, Bob.
The drug cartels are drooling over this decision.
But since there is no Federal ban on the abortion pill, states like Texas will have to fight the cartels on their own.
Good luck with that.
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg with regard to Texas troubles from their abortion ban.
Whatever else may be true, Texas is toast.
They are going to see a mass migration of scientists and engineers from the state. Google has already made that possible for their own employees and I suspect that lots of professors will be leaving the University of Texas system as well. If Texas hoped to establish themselves as another high tech state, they just ensured that that won’t happen. They are going to be related to the backwater of history.
If you are an engineer or scientist working for a tech firm like Google, why stay in a hot, backwater state covered with sagebrush and run by the Taliban when you could be living on the coast of California or in Boston?
If the inevitable loss of profs from the U of Texas is not enough, just imagine the students they are going to be left with and new students they will attract: Kyle Rittenhouse will be one of those geniuses.
The University will have to offer such intellectual majors as “Weapons Studies” and Self Defense Studies (aka. How to shoot an unarmed person on the street and get away with it)
Come to think of it, maybe they should hire Kyle as a prof to teach the courses. They can give him an honorary Doctorate (Doctor of Fullofsophy), since he already clearly knows more than anyone else about such stuff.
Oh, and of course they will have to greatly expand their Religious Studies program to encompass the vast majority of the course offerings with required courses like “Taliban 101: How to control your women and make sure they stay in the bedroom and produce babies — and are not heard OR seen outside the home.
And the University of Texas system can hire Taliban Supreme leader Mullah Akhundzata as their President to make sure the transition goes violently.
However unenforceable these laws may appear, their existence will be a great deterrent. Our lives are controlled more and more.
“the current majority on the Supreme Court is not conservative; it is radical, in its reckless disregard for precedent and the safety of citizens”
It’s
The Tommyban
The Tommyban
Has hit the fan
And nation’s plan
Is in the can
As far as Miranda rights … I have been arrested at least seven times … maybe a few times more … NOT ONCE have I been read my Miranda rights. I remember asking to be read them & the cops LAUGHED at me. They said (I’ll never forget this) “Do you think you’re in a TV show?” … you never hear them. The best thing to remember is to JUST STFU & that COPS LIE.
Seven times? Clearly you are guilty of something. Why else would they arrest you? (Just know that’s what lots of folks are thinking.)
Can I guess?
She was arrested for nonviolent protest.
I’ve been teaching U.S. history and government for 34 years and it’s hard to not feel like, what the HELL, what have I been DOING? Look at this MESS!
Today, January 6, November 8, 2016, and on…..
But Diane’s comment that, “My generation has failed”.
No how, no way.
Not Diane….not the people her age.
Amid a tsunami of words right now, I just had to say that -as a friend….and as a student and teacher of history.
BTW, I had to look up your birthday, Diane. You seem timeless to me.
Hang in there, all.
If this SCOTUS could repeal the Bill of Rights, and maybe the Constitution itself, they would. There only guiding principle is ensuring profit for the powerful, and for at least one of them, Christian domination.
That’s exactly what the Dobbs decision is. It’s a kind of anti-Bill of Rights. A template for undoing the whole body of law dealing with unenumerated rights. Plowing the field for the planting of the strangling vines of fascism in our green and pleasant land.
They don’t even have to change the name of the Bill of Rights [Rightwingers]
This is a lawsuit that needs to happen going forwards. Please share widely if you agree with this idea.
Any state that will now force a woman to give birth to a baby she did not want, especially in the case of rape and incest, and also for medically dangerous pregnancies, must now pay for ALL of the medical and other expenses associated with the pregnancy, birth and care of that woman and the child until that child can be placed for adoption. If the child is not adopted in a reasonable period of time and the woman still does not want that child, the state must place the child in a fully funded, well regulated facility that will adequately care for it in all ways. The state cannot be allowed to impose an unfunded mandate on the woman and her family, if any. This law must also include the payment of lost wages for the time that the woman cannot work due to being pregnant and giving birth.
The irony here is that this law will force the pro-birth movement to become an actual pro-life movement. It will force the state to provide many of the social services that red states and politicians etc. incorrectly view as socialism and are otherwise ideologically opposed to. This must include, at minimum, child care and pre-school, and the mother of the child must be allowed to choose who provides all of these things herself, the state may not force her to place the child in any religious or other institution or favor the use of religious institutions in any way. If the mother decides to care for the child herself until it’s adopted, the state must pay her to do that. If the state finds that this policy is too expensive, then the state must raise its own taxes on its own citizens to bridge the gap. Since this is now a states rights issue, no federal monies may be sent to or used by the state to do this, and no financial shell games will be allowed. If states are gonna talk the talk, they must be FORCED to walk the walk. If the politicians of any state don’t like this, let them sue rapists to recover what they can from them.
If that doesn’t produce the necessary revenue stream, then sue those states to make them levy taxes on Christian Churches (only) since it is their ideology and beliefs that for decades were the driving force behind this obscene reversal. There is no secular pro birth, anti-abortion movement of any consequence.
Perhaps we could do a DNA and garnish the wages of the fathers to pay for the care of the child. Roe would come back like a Southwest wind
Reblogged this on dean ramser.
In UK’s style, instead of talking about the left and the right, it’s time to refer to the republican party as the People’s Control Party and refer to them as the PCP or the Controllers. Their program is to control our lives, the lives of the (growing) majority.
Is there a nonviolent way of stopping this supremely stupid court to ruin our and our children’s lives?
Yes; pass the Judicial Act & add more judges (I think the # is 4) under the Biden Administration. Ever since the latest bad actors were confirmed, people have been calling out for this solution. Probably easier said then done (Senate confirmation required?) but now, maybe, Collins & Manchin would support & it could pass. GET IT DONE BEFORE 11/8!!!
Is there hope that Biden will act on this? He doesn’t even seem to consider seriously the college tuition forgiveness program.
What I really meant to ask is if there is a nonviolent way of not only stopping the court to make more disasters in the future but to also quickly overturn their recent decisons on gun rights, abortion rights. It seems to me that nothing can legally overrule a SCOTUS decision. There is no “spreme-supreme court”, is there?
The Supreme court’s Achilles heel is that they have no enforcement power. Without Congress and the President, they might as well be a circle jerk. And since these days , Congress couldn’t agree on the type of coffee to have in the Capital break room, it comes down to whether the President will enforce the decisions.
States like Maine and NY can exploit that and simply ignore the recent decisions handed down (which overturns NY’s concealed carry !aw and Maine’sban on funding for religious schools — which now effectively forces Maine to act to actually violate the Establishment clause of the Constitution!!)
And all the President has to do is nothing.
But of course, in the abortion case, its the opposite situation since the federal government would actually have to prevent states from imposing bans on abortion and it is very unlikely that that will happen.
Mate
What we really need is an infinite regress of Supremes.
With your mathematical expertise, perhaps you could work up a plan
News release: “A decision was just released today by the Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supremes Supreme Supreme Supreme Court,
which overturns a previous decision by the Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supremes Supreme Supreme Court, which itself overturned a decision by the Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Supremes Supreme Court.
Come to think of it, maybe an infinite regress is not necessary because if we have enough different Supreme Courts, they will never be able to settle anything.
Supreme Castration
Tie them up in knot
Endless twisted braid
Emasculate the lot
Undermine their raid
I would suggest an AI court, but after being forced onto the shoulder by a Tesla driving down the middle of the road recently, I think that might not be such a good idea.
Here is the letter that I sent to Holcomb:
Governor Holcomb quote: “The Supreme Court’s decision is clear, and it is now up to the states to address this important issue. We’ll do that in short order in Indiana. I’ve already called the General Assembly back on July 6, and I expect members to take up this matter as well.
I have been clear in stating I am pro-life. We have an opportunity to make progress in protecting the sanctity of life, and that’s exactly what we will do.”
………………………………………………………………………………………
“Protecting the sanctity of life” sounds so admirable. It means this: DO EVERYTHING TO GET THE FETUS BORN. After being born, reality sets in. The reality is that many women simply cannot afford to have another child. How much money is Indiana going to give to EACH woman so that she can raise a child properly? Many women have to quit their jobs to stay home to take care of an unwanted baby. This money for child support from the state must continue until the child is 18 years old.
Republicans are continuously against any meaningful gun control. A child, after it is born, is free to be killed by guns. Nothing is ever done. Remember the number of children killed while in school by automatic rifles? Indiana doesn’t care about children being killed by guns or meaningful gun control laws would be passed.
How many children are free to continuously worry about getting enough food to eat? How many will die because their parents can’t afford food AND healthcare? What is Indiana doing to give the homeless decent places to live? Nothing.
How many children go to school in buildings that need repair and the class sizes are huge because Indiana refuses to fund PUBLIC school education adequately ? There is a severe shortage of teachers. What is Indiana doing to ensure that ALL children get a good education? Nothing.
As I said before. Republicans care about the ‘sanctity of life’ ONLY until the fetus is born. After that, it is free to die and get a rotten education. Living children don’t matter.
Well, they also care about “life after death”, but only for true believers.
The Believers will be beamed up to Heaven by Scotty’s transporter and everyone else will be left to duke it out on a Hellish earth caused by burning fossil fuels.
Well, SDHP, isn’t this what TX A.G. said? The 21 (really, 22, w/the husband who’d died of a heart attack immediately following the massacre) are all in Heaven, now, part of “G-d’s plan.”
–rtbmtkhysterical
Well, I think dead people at best have been looking for Heaven for eternity, so I’d rather be here on “Hellish Earth” for a bit a longer, and I bet very few of those 22 would have a different preference.