Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Sunday, October 31, 2021

Robert Barnes: The Supreme Court will face a bramble of unsettled legal questions when it reviews Texas's most-restrictive-in-the-nation abortion law Monday, but the inquiry itself is evidence of a changed court whose view of abortion as a constitutional right is in doubt.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

What could possibly go wrong?

#1 | Posted by moder8 at 2021-11-01 12:20 PM | Reply

Surprise surprise. Two justices that swore they would protect abortion rights because its the law of the land are seemingly ready to allow the Texas law to continue.

#2 | Posted by Sycophant at 2021-11-01 02:29 PM | Reply

#2

Doesn't jive with what I'm seeing so far.

lawandcrime.com

reason.com

#3 | Posted by et_al at 2021-11-01 03:47 PM | Reply

"Doesn't jive with what I'm seeing so far."

Then why didn't SCOTUS allow Roe to stand until a Court decides otherwise?

#4 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-11-01 04:08 PM | Reply

#4

Procedural problems with the substantive law of injunctions.

#5 | Posted by et_al at 2021-11-01 04:53 PM | Reply

The right to privacy means "butt out". That what what Roe v. Wade is based on.

And freedom is worth more than life.

#6 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2021-11-01 04:55 PM | Reply

"Justice Alito asked several times during the proceedings about legal mechanisms available to women who wished to sue their abortion providers if they came to regret their decisions to abort their pregnancies."

^
What a delightful twist on the "sex she regrets later is rape" right-wing meme!

#7 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-11-01 05:27 PM | Reply

#7

Why abort the remainder of the paragraph?

The topic seemed front-and-center to Alito's mind despite it not being the issue of the day.

#8 | Posted by et_al at 2021-11-01 06:01 PM | Reply

"The topic seemed front-and-center to Alito's mind despite it not being the issue of the day."

Yeah that's not a good look for a Supreme Court justice. He sounds like an abortion-obsessed freak, convinced that buyer's remorse needs some kind of judicial activism remedy.

#9 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-11-01 07:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#8 | Posted by et_al

Agreed - it makes him look worse

#10 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2021-11-02 09:58 AM | Reply

And freedom is worth more than life.
#6 | POSTED BY HELIUMRAT

Uh huh. Sure comrade.

Now.

Define freedom.

#11 | Posted by donnerboy at 2021-11-02 01:19 PM | Reply

And freedom is worth more than life.
#6 | POSTED BY HELIUMRAT

Clearly in rock paper scissors the second amendment beats a few dozen elementary school kids.

#12 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2021-11-02 02:20 PM | Reply

"Justice Breyer noted that SB 8 claims were "not an ordinary tort lawsuit" and articulated six reasons why: (1) anybody can sue regardless of direct harm; (2) the suits can be filed anywhere in Texas (Breyer noted that a defendant could be hauled into court hours from home, which he said posed a signifiant problem given the state's size compared to, for instance, Rhode Island); (3) old SB 8 lawsuits have no preclusive effect, meaning that thousands of lawsuits could fail without any bar on the filing of new claims; (4) attorneys fees are shifted to the defendants; (5) the financial penalty " at least $10,000 per abortion, or possibly more " is heavy; and (6) SB 8 explicitly limits defenses, including the "undue burden" defense."

The law was made not to protect life, but rather punish abortion providers and recipients in violation of the right to privacy between a woman and her doctor to appease the talibaptist forced birth wing of the party.

It would be nice if just once "pro life" meant providing children with health care, food and an education. The GQP only cares about life until the moment you are born, then you are on your own.

#13 | Posted by Nixon at 2021-11-03 09:06 AM | Reply

"It would be nice if just once "pro life" meant providing children with health care, food and an education."

The anti-abortion has always been and will always be an attack on women's rights.

As you pointed out, if they cared about children, they'd be demanding new mothers and fathers get paid maternity leave, they'd be demanding affordable child care, and so on.

#14 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-11-03 09:15 AM | Reply

Of course the court is going to allow RvW to stand. The conservative judges arent activist judges. They will interpret the law, liberals would try and use the court to change law.

#15 | Posted by boaz at 2021-11-03 09:16 AM | Reply

"The conservative judges arent activist judges."

Alito sure wants to be.

"They will interpret the law, liberals would try and use the court to change law."

That's a distinction without a difference. Come on, man!

Once a law is interpreted... if it runs afoul of the Constitution... the Supreme Court changes it -- including sending it back to a lower court to change it.

#16 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-11-03 09:20 AM | Reply

Well, it's my understanding the states cannot ban abortion, but they can put limits on it. Which is exactly what Texas is doing.

Liberals love when guns are restricted, abortion, not so much.

#17 | Posted by boaz at 2021-11-03 09:33 AM | Reply

"Well, it's my understanding the states cannot ban abortion, but they can put limits on it. Which is exactly what Texas is doing."

Please try understanding better.

The Texas law places no new restrictions on abortion itself.

#18 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-11-03 09:41 AM | Reply

The Texas law places no new restrictions on abortion itself.

Depends on your definition.

And as usual, you are nitpicking. You know what I'm saying.

#19 | Posted by boaz at 2021-11-03 09:47 AM | Reply

Liberals love when guns are restricted, abortion, not so much.

#17 | POSTED BY BOAZ AT 2021-11-03 09:33 AM

Abortion is a health issue affecting only one gender and the restrictions mean nothing if you have money. This is purely about punishing women for having sex. The man is never the one saddled with growing another human inside his body because the condom broke or he accidentally skipped a pill. I am against abortion in any situation I have control over but I do understand that what other women do is not my business and should be between only herself and her physician. You have a control issue Boaz and frankly IT IS NOT YOUR BUSINESS unless the woman is carrying your child.

#20 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2021-11-03 10:04 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2022 World Readable

Drudge Retort