Roe v. Wade Potentially Dead

[The Nehor]

The draft majority opinion of a ruling overturning Roe v. Wade was leaked. Looks like at least five justices agree with the decision. This is only a draft and Justices can and do shift their opinions before final rulings are made so this is tentative and could change but I doubt it will.

If this ruling is finalized abortion is not protected at the federal level. This means the issue devolves to the states unless or until Congress passes a federal law about abortion (which would probably face another court challenge itself). Some states still have laws on the books making abortion illegal and others have already passed laws heavily restricting abortions to early timeframes. There will probably be additional challenges on bills circulating that make it illegal to go out of state to get an abortion. The abortion bounty law of my own state is an interesting perverted twist on avoiding court scrutiny.

I think back to my political science professor in college who stated that legal scholars generally agreed that the reasoning in Roe v. Wade (7-2 decision) was weak and I agreed after I read it. I was unsurprised to see that in the majority opinion. Some pro-choice legalisms advocated wanting to retry it on better grounds. The ruling takes pains to protect some of the precedents roe relied on as being still valid so looks like interracial marriage rights are safe. Meanwhile the argument about rights created that have no basis in history is a dagger aimed at (among other things) the rulings that ended anti-sodomy laws and protect same sex marriage so those are on shaky ground.

This kind of document leaking pretty much never happens and it is not clear who leaked it. There are valid reasons either side of the debate might want it released early. If they figure out which clerk did it that person’s legal career will suffer a setback. The final ruling is probably about two months out.

I am interested to see if the Church changes the abortion exceptions in reaction to this or adds a proviso about following the law when seeking one or anything of that sort. The rules walked a tightrope between the primary positions and the Brethren have not spoken much on the matter of late.

[Jaydes]

I really hope the decision is finalized and that it is overturned and remains overturned. Allowing abortion is one of the major things bringing this nature under divine condemnation.

[Meadowchik]

22 minutes ago, Jaydes said:

I really hope the decision is finalized and that it is overturned and remains overturned. Allowing abortion is one of the major things bringing this nature under divine condemnation.

I used to think that and then I began speaking to women about it. I've also become a mother myself and accumulated and observed more life experiences. 

My sister would probably be dead if abortion had been illegal when she had a tubal pregnancy. Personally, despite having six full-term pregnancies, including twins and all healthy babies, I have also been through enough and my body enough that my perspective has changed. I've been fortunate, but even then there have been close calls and I can see how my life and health could have easily gone sideways, threatening my health and safety and my kids.

Extending that understanding to others, it's obvious: there's no way I or anyone else can presume to know what a woman needs to do with her reproductive choices. It's certainly not Christlike to assume control over Everywoman. 

Criminalising abortion is wrong, even evil. The higher law is to respect women and trust them and their judgement over their bodies and lives.

[Teancum]

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The draft majority opinion of a ruling overturning Roe v. Wade was leaked. Looks like at least five justices agree with the decision. This is only a draft and Justices can and do shift their opinions before final rulings are made so this is tentative and could change but I doubt it will.

If this ruling is finalized abortion is not protected at the federal level. This means the issue devolves to the states unless or until Congress passes a federal law about abortion (which would probably face another court challenge itself). Some states still have laws on the books making abortion illegal and others have already passed laws heavily restricting abortions to early timeframes. There will probably be additional challenges on bills circulating that make it illegal to go out of state to get an abortion. The abortion bounty law of my own state is an interesting perverted twist on avoiding court scrutiny.

I think back to my political science professor in college who stated that legal scholars generally agreed that the reasoning in Roe v. Wade (7-2 decision) was weak and I agreed after I read it. I was unsurprised to see that in the majority opinion. Some pro-choice legalisms advocated wanting to retry it on better grounds. The ruling takes pains to protect some of the precedents roe relied on as being still valid so looks like interracial marriage rights are safe. Meanwhile the argument about rights created that have no basis in history is a dagger aimed at (among other things) the rulings that ended anti-sodomy laws and protect same sex marriage so those are on shaky ground.

This kind of document leaking pretty much never happens and it is not clear who leaked it. There are valid reasons either side of the debate might want it released early. If they figure out which clerk did it that person’s legal career will suffer a setback. The final ruling is probably about two months out.

I am interested to see if the Church changes the abortion exceptions in reaction to this or adds a proviso about following the law when seeking one or anything of that sort. The rules walked a tightrope between the primary positions and the Brethren have not spoken much on the matter of late.

I must say I am rather surprised about this.  Even with the current court make up I did not think they would move this far.  Nice to know the three Trump appointed judges are liars like any other politician.  They all said Roe was settled law.

Edited May 3, 2022 by Teancum

[jkwilliams]

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Most Americans don’t want a blanket ban on abortions, with no exceptions, but that is what some state legislatures have been pushing. I would imagine there will be unintended consequences for people on both sides of this issue. But in the short term, the potential for overreach seems to lie with the anti-abortion folks. 

Be careful what you wish for. 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

My sister would probably be dead if abortion had been illegal when she had a tubal pregnancy.

Missouri dropped that from their abortion bill, right?  So what states currently are or appear to be making tubal pregnancies illegal.  Ohio supposed requiring them to be implanted (which is currently medically impossible)?

I find it hard to believe legislators would be this uneducated to pass this stuff, but no time to fact check.  Are these just false headlines or for real?

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Calm said:

Missouri dropped that from their abortion bill, right?  So what states currently are or appear to be making tubal pregnancies illegal.  Ohio supposed requiring them to be implanted (which is currently medically impossible)?

I find it hard to believe legislators would be this uneducated to pass this stuff, but no time to fact check.  Are these just false headlines or for real?

Never underestimate the idiocy of elected officials. Our Senate primary here in Ohio is the most embarrassing political spectacle I’ve ever witnessed. 

[pogi]

2 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Criminalising abortion is wrong, even evil.

Blanket criminalization is wrong, I agree.  But so too is blanket decriminalization.

 I don’t think we will all ever agree on where that line should be, but I hope that most of us can at least agree with that.

[gopher]

It'll be interesting to see how the states react.  Recently the Virginia House of Delegates tried to pass a bill that would allow abortions even when a mother in perfect physical health is in labor.  So I'm not sure the overreach will only be with the anti-abortion folks.

Last week four of the Supreme Court Justices attended the DC Temple open house (including John Roberts and Ketanji Jackson) so it's possible the church can be blamed somehow if the Justices overturn the ruling.

[katherine the great]

21 minutes ago, Calm said:

I find it hard to believe legislators would be this uneducated to pass this stuff, but no time to fact check.

You apparently haven’t met some of our Idaho legislators. I don’t know about Ohio law, but some Eastern Idaho legislators are truly that uneducated (I like to use the words “stupid” or “moronic” but that isn’t very nice.)

[provoman]

If the 14th Amendment does not allow for abortion because  abortion is not mentioned in the Constitution AND the history of the US is anti-abortion; then the 14th Amendment does not protect marriage period - no mixed race/ethnic marriage, no same sex marriage.

What other rights are lost due to “not mentioned in the Constitution AND the history of the US has been against that claimed “right”.  Terrible unofficial opinion for the fall-out …. 

[Calm]

I understand the reason we can not sue legislators, but more and more I wish we could in special cases.

No religious test I would hope, but a test for basic understanding on areas they are making law on perhaps?  A law against them doing fundraising activities so they can spend the time on the laws they are writing.  There are many things I hate in our current system.

[provoman]

58 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Most Americans don’t want a blanket ban on abortions, with no exceptions, but that is what some state legislatures have been pushing. I would imagine there will be unintended consequences for people on both sides of this issue. But in the short term, the potential for overreach seems to lie with the anti-abortion folks. 

Be careful what you wish for. 

This morning I thought, Did no one read Greek tragedies - when you set out to abolish the thing you despise, you become the instrument of its manifestation 

[SteveO]

At least Supreme Court justices are going to have a much easier time defining what a woman is now despite not having a degree in biology.

[Raingirl]

3 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

I used to think that and then I began speaking to women about it. I've also become a mother myself and accumulated and observed more life experiences. 

My sister would probably be dead if abortion had been illegal when she had a tubal pregnancy. Personally, despite having six full-term pregnancies, including twins and all healthy babies, I have also been through enough and my body enough that my perspective has changed. I've been fortunate, but even then there have been close calls and I can see how my life and health could have easily gone sideways, threatening my health and safety and my kids.

Extending that understanding to others, it's obvious: there's no way I or anyone else can presume to know what a woman needs to do with her reproductive choices. It's certainly not Christlike to assume control over Everywoman. 

Criminalising abortion is wrong, even evil. The higher law is to respect women and trust them and their judgement over their bodies and lives.

Ectopic pregnancies have nothing to do with abortion. An ectopic pregnancy cannot continue, the baby will not survive past a few weeks,  the Fallopian tube will eventually rupture, which can be life-threatening. Intervention must happen. 
I don’t care if a person is for or against abortion, don’t tell lies to argue your side.  Ending an ectopic pregnancy is not an abortion, despite the fact that a couple of states are trying to twist science and the law to make it so. 

[pogi]

As if political tension in our country wasn't stiff enough. 

When the justices try to decanonize what is akin to sacred canon for some...I'm no prophet but...hold on tight!

From Covid, to Trump, back to Covid, to Black lives matter, to Jan 6/Trump/the big lie/democracy hanging by a thread, to an "illegitimate" President, to Russia, to Roe vs. Wade, with an undercurrent of global warming throughout.  What a ride it has been from 2020!  How much more can America endure?  Will the 2024 elections herald in the end of the world?

Edited May 3, 2022 by pogi

[jkwilliams]

3 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

Ectopic pregnancies have nothing to do with abortion. An ectopic pregnancy cannot continue, the baby will not survive past a few weeks,  the Fallopian tube will eventually rupture, which can be life-threatening. Intervention must happen. 
I don’t care if a person is for or against abortion, don’t tell lies to argue your side.  Ending an ectopic pregnancy is not an abortion, despite the fact that a couple of states are trying to twist science and the law to make it so. 

Tell that to the Ohio legislature. 

[rongo]

I think the leak was intended to pressure the justices favoring overturning Roe (pressure from the ensuing firestorm from the leak). It remains to be seen what the ultimate outcome is. 

[SteveO]

7 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Tell that to the Ohio legislature. 

Will do.  In the meantime, stop using the very rare exception to justify the vast rule: terminating unwanted babies at one’s convenience 

[BlueDreams]

5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

 

I am interested to see if the Church changes the abortion exceptions in reaction to this or adds a proviso about following the law when seeking one or anything of that sort. The rules walked a tightrope between the primary positions and the Brethren have not spoken much on the matter of late.

I doubt it but maybe? My doubt is based on the fact that this policy hasn’t been tweaked for any other government system that has more restrictions around abortion that don’t match church policies. So I don’t think the US is all that special. Plus this will in the near future become a state issue. Which mean a state or likely region may have super restrictive abortion policies (like TX) but a nearby state doesn’t. So difficult cases may be transferred to another state. Which is still dangerous and a problem if the pregnancy is Life threatening. 
 

56 minutes ago, pogi said:

Blanket criminalization is wrong, I agree.  But so too is blanket decriminalization.

 I don’t think we will all ever agree on where that line should be, but I hope that most of us can at least agree with that.

the problem i see with this is that it will likely make the above statement the deflacto experience within the states as people either move to super restrictive or super open abortion policies. We do not have the political environment right now to make a more common sense middle ground policy similar to most European countries right now. 
 

with luv, 

BD 
 

[Danzo]

About time!

[sunstoned]

21 minutes ago, pogi said:

As if political tension in our country wasn't stiff enough. 

When the justices try to decanonize what is akin to sacred canon for some...I'm no prophet but...hold on tight!

From Covid, to Trump, back to Covid, to Black lives matter, to Jan 6/Trump/the big lie/democracy hanging by a thread, to an "illegitimate" President, to Russia, to Roe vs. Wade, with an undercurrent of global warming throughout.  What a ride it has been from 2020!  How much more can America endure?  Will the 2024 elections herald in the end of the world?

I am truly weeping for my country right now.  The political system has been hijacked by a minorly element.  They have destroyed the republican party, have legitimized deception and lies in political discourse, and have trampled upon precedent.  The hypocrisy that has now become common place is a cancer to democracy.  Case in point.  Vaccines - you can't tell me what to do.  It is my body my choice.  Abortion - you lose the right to your body's reproductive system, because we say so.

Edited May 3, 2022 by sunstoned

[Nofear]

1 minute ago, sunstoned said:

 and have trampled upon precedent. 

I suspect some precedents you were quite happy to be “trampled” upon (e.g. marriage redefinition). I know there are some things I am happy are changing too (just not necessarily the same things).

[Meadowchik]

28 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

Ectopic pregnancies have nothing to do with abortion. An ectopic pregnancy cannot continue, the baby will not survive past a few weeks,  the Fallopian tube will eventually rupture, which can be life-threatening. Intervention must happen. 
I don’t care if a person is for or against abortion, don’t tell lies to argue your side.  Ending an ectopic pregnancy is not an abortion, despite the fact that a couple of states are trying to twist science and the law to make it so. 

Please be more careful about calling people liars.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.catholicnewsagency.com/amp/news/41307/pro-life-doctors-despite-ohio-bill-there-is-no-procedure-to-save-ectopic-pregnancies

[Meadowchik]

22 minutes ago, SteveO said:

Will do.  In the meantime, stop using the very rare exception to justify the vast rule: terminating unwanted babies at one’s convenience 

FTR I gave the example of ectopic pregnancy because it is one that I knew of through my sister. But I did not rely on that rare exception for the formation of my argument. 

I've listened to women including those who've had abortions, and it's not as if most take it likely or consider abortion a matter of convenience. Even an otherwise healthy pregnancy can present indirect risks to the health and safety of the mother and her other family members.