Politics
Sponsored By

Explain it to me like I'm five (Roe vs Wade overturned)

6,437 Views | 86 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by agracer
ThunderFighter06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

What does this mean other than feminazis losing their minds on social media? Already seeing people talking about moving to Europe!
Urban Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It simply means that the legality of performing an abortion is sent back to the states.
Clob94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10th amendment.



Anything not listed as under federal control (abortion) gets to be decided state by state.
MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
They had a previous court fabricate abortion as a universal federal civil right to privacy. That is has been overturned. Now it is a state level right based on state law.
No Spin Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Urban Ag said:

It simply means that the legality of performing an abortion is sent back to the states.


Exactly.

Abortions aren't going to stop being done by Americans, they'll just be done in blue states.
There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the later ignorance. Hippocrates
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
States can now pass and enforce laws restricting or even prohibiting abortion.
GarlandAg2012
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Urban Ag said:

It simply means that the legality of performing an abortion is sent back to the states.
A number of states have laws that were never repealed or new laws specifically written to trigger abortion bans at various stages if Roe v Wade was overturned. In states where it is legal, it is still legal.
javajaws
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Urban Ag said:

It simply means that the legality of performing an abortion is sent back to the states.
Well, the feds could pass legislation as well. But the key point here being that elected representatives get to decide if abortion is legal or not from now on...not SCOTUS.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Ben Franklin
Maroon Dawn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That there is no constitutional right to an abortion which means it returns to being a power to regulate by the individual states

NY can still have abortion up to the first breath and Oklahoma can ban it completely. Most will still fall in the middle

AgBQ-00
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It means it goes back to the states. Those that want to ban it can those that want to kill babies can. It is a great step in the right direction. It is left up to the people and their elected officials now. It may never happen but it leaves the possibility to eventually have pro-life laws enacted in murder states. Have to win the discussions and elections though for that to happen.
Communists aren't people. They are property of the state.
BQ78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Nothing will change in liberal states like New York, Illinois and California. In fact, the abortion rights will liberalize more in those states if they aren't already post-birth.

Now Texas, Alabama and conservative states may opt out of legalized murder.
aggie93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's all about where you live now. If you are in Texas then abortion is severely restricted based on Texas law. If you are in NY you can get an abortion while you are in labor.
Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant; it is just that they know so much that isn't so.

Ronald Reagan
Premium
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Next step, federally ban abortions. Not allowing murder is definitely a federal issue.
GeorgiAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
NY, CA, OR, WA, C0 - abortions still legal

Basically SEC states - abortion will be illegal.


It's all a fiendish plot by SEC schools to create more 5* athletes.
twk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
javajaws said:

Urban Ag said:

It simply means that the legality of performing an abortion is sent back to the states.
Well, the feds could pass legislation as well. But the key point here being that elected representatives get to decide if abortion is legal or not from now on...not SCOTUS.
Probably not, at least not that would pass scrutiny with this court. And that applies to federal statutes outlawing abortion as well as those legalizing abortion. The Commerce Clause doesn't give Congress the power to outlaw or legalize abortion.
One Louder
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Don't most European countries have stricter abortion laws than we did yesterday?
Ragoo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Federalism wins
Zarathustra
How long do you want to ignore this user?

I've argued with a few Democrats online. They're mad because they think the Supreme Court outlawed abortion. "Nine people shouldnt decide the law!" When you point out that the Supreme Court just said it's up to the states, they get mad and point out that many states will outlaw abortion. When I tell them welcome to democracy, they get mad and say that the Supreme Court should legalize abortion. Then I point out that they really do want nine people deciding the law, they get mad again.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
javajaws said:

Urban Ag said:

It simply means that the legality of performing an abortion is sent back to the states.
Well, the feds could pass legislation as well. But the key point here being that elected representatives get to decide if abortion is legal or not from now on...not SCOTUS.
I don't think a federal law attempting to protect abortion as a constitutional right would stand, under Dobbs.

They are free to try but it would be quickly challenged, fast tracked and struck down.
ScapeGOAT
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Next year you'll be six
twk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
One Louder said:

Don't most European countries have stricter abortion laws than we did yesterday?
The Mississippi 15 week ban would have been in line with most European laws.
ThunderFighter06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Wow thank you for all the quick replies! I thought it meant that it would be decided by the states. Was wondering if had missed something based on the level of meltdown I'm seeing!
No Spin Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Zarathustra said:


I've argued with a few Democrats online. They're mad because they think the Supreme Court outlawed abortion. When you point out that the Supreme Court just said it's up to the states, they get mad and point out that many states will outlaw abortion. When I tell them welcome to democracy, they get mad and say that the Supreme Court should legalize abortion. Then I point out that they really do what nine justices deciding the law, they get mad again.



What those dems don't think about, probably because it'll take work, is simply changing their states to blue so that the laws in their state can be changed. Laws obviously can be changed, and all they need to do is do the work required to do it. I doubt they'll get off their keyboards long enough to do the work necessary, but it's not impossible.
There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the later ignorance. Hippocrates
Stinky T
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ThunderFighter06 said:

Wow thank you for all the quick replies! I thought it meant that it would be decided by the states. Was wondering if had missed something based on the level of meltdown I'm seeing!


In case you didn't already know, there are a lot of ignorant, very misinformed individuals in this country. And it seems the vast majority of them have a Twitter account.
_mpaul
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I would guess that at least 80% of the people losing their minds over this do not understand that this does not mean abortions are banned under federal law.
_mpaul
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

javajaws said:

Urban Ag said:

It simply means that the legality of performing an abortion is sent back to the states.
Well, the feds could pass legislation as well. But the key point here being that elected representatives get to decide if abortion is legal or not from now on...not SCOTUS.
I don't think a federal law attempting to protect abortion as a constitutional right would stand, under Dobbs.

They are free to try but it would be quickly challenged, fast tracked and struck down.
What part of Dobbs makes you think that?
agracer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Unfortunately in KS the KS supreme court decided an unlimited right to abortion was written into the KS Constitution in 1855.

If Roe is overturned then the Value Them Both Amendment will be more important then ever to get pass on Aug 2.

Lies and propaganda surrounding this amendment started last year and are ramping up this summer.

https://sentinelksmo.org/value-them-both-allows-regulations-but-doesnt-ban-abortions-as-opponents-imply/
aTm2004
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Abortion is no longer a federal decision, but rather a state decision.

Red states like Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, etc will have restrictions, if not almost ban them.

Blue states will be asking the mother if she wants the clump of cells aborted while it's crowing in the delivery room.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
_mpaul said:

aggiehawg said:

javajaws said:

Urban Ag said:

It simply means that the legality of performing an abortion is sent back to the states.
Well, the feds could pass legislation as well. But the key point here being that elected representatives get to decide if abortion is legal or not from now on...not SCOTUS.
I don't think a federal law attempting to protect abortion as a constitutional right would stand, under Dobbs.

They are free to try but it would be quickly challenged, fast tracked and struck down.
What part of Dobbs makes you think that?

10th Amendment part. Not in the Constitution itself? Goes back to the states. Not within the purview of the federal government.

Besides, separation of powers. Neither the legislative branch nor the Executive Branch (nor the judiciary for that matter) can create a Constitutional right out of thin air. Need to amend the Constitution itself.
twk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
_mpaul said:

aggiehawg said:

javajaws said:

Urban Ag said:

It simply means that the legality of performing an abortion is sent back to the states.
Well, the feds could pass legislation as well. But the key point here being that elected representatives get to decide if abortion is legal or not from now on...not SCOTUS.
I don't think a federal law attempting to protect abortion as a constitutional right would stand, under Dobbs.

They are free to try but it would be quickly challenged, fast tracked and struck down.
What part of Dobbs makes you think that?

Page 77 of the majority opinion:

Quote:

It follows that the States may regulate abortion for legitimate reasons, and when such regulations are challenged under the Constitution, courts cannot "substitute their social and economic beliefs for the judgment of legislative bodies." Ferguson, 372 U. S., at 729730; see also Dandridge v. Williams, 397 U. S. 471, 484486 (1970); United States v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U. S. 144, 152 (1938). That respect for a legislature's judgment applies even when thelaws at issue concern matters of great social significance and moral substance. See, e.g., Board of Trustees of Univ. of Ala. v. Garrett, 531 U. S. 356, 365368 (2001) ("treatment of the disabled"); Glucksberg, 521 U. S., at 728 ("assisted suicide"); San Antonio Independent School Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U. S. 1, 3235, 55 (1973) ("financing public education").
Not explicit, but clearly states who may regulate abortion, and it's not Congress.
_mpaul
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

_mpaul said:

aggiehawg said:

javajaws said:

Urban Ag said:

It simply means that the legality of performing an abortion is sent back to the states.
Well, the feds could pass legislation as well. But the key point here being that elected representatives get to decide if abortion is legal or not from now on...not SCOTUS.
I don't think a federal law attempting to protect abortion as a constitutional right would stand, under Dobbs.

They are free to try but it would be quickly challenged, fast tracked and struck down.
What part of Dobbs makes you think that?

10th Amendment part. Not in the Constitution itself? Goes back to the states. Not within the purview of the federal government.

Besides, separation of powers. Neither the legislative branch nor the Executive Branch (nor the judiciary for that matter) can create a Constitutional right out of thin air. Need to amend the Constitution itself.
I don't think that would stop Congress from passing a law provided it found some jurisdictional basis for it, like the ICC. And let's face it, it's not like the Court hasn't also stretched the scope of the ICC beyond reason in the last 80 years. If they can stop some poor dude from growing wheat for his own use . . .
Kvetch
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
With the vast expansion of the federal government using the commerce clause, you could probably justify a federal law with one case of a person crossing state lines for an abortion.

Or maybe this court would start reversing some of the garbage federal powers gained through that clause. Seems like a win-win to me.
agsfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Does this mean the states authority to legislate basically any medical procedure? If the state of Texas decided to pass a law banning vasectomies for people under the age of 30, would that hold up?
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
agsfan said:

Does this mean the states authority to legislate basically any medical procedure? If the state of Texas decided to pass a law banning vasectomies for people under the age of 30, would that hold up?
No. The majority specifically states it only applies to abortion, period.
Kvetch
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
agsfan said:

Does this mean the states authority to legislate basically any medical procedure? If the state of Texas decided to pass a law banning vasectomies for people under the age of 30, would that hold up?


They wouldn't do that, but Roe never banned it. What constitutional right do you have to a vasectomy?
Last Page
Page 1 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.