Some Democrat state should make an equivalent law regarding buying guns or registering as a Republican and see if the Supreme Court will make the same decision. — Michael
The other being that I take the pro-life folks at their word that their concern is over fetal rights and not a desire to subjugate women. — Hanover
This isn't correct on a couple of levels, the first being that life for a woman in Afghanistan bears little resemblance for life as a woman in the US, with likely 0% of the US women wishing Taliban policies would be instituted in the US upon them. — Hanover
Many states have enacted similar laws, which have been blocked. But this one is especially egregious.
It has used the architecture of the state to promote the rule of the mob. It prohibits officials from enforcing it, instead deputising ordinary citizens to sue anyone for suspected violations. While designed this way to make legal challenges harder, it is part of the broader turn of Trump Republicans towards vigilantism and away from democratic institutions. By promising a $10,000 bounty to anyone who sues successfully, it encourages the greedy as well as vindictive ex-partners and zealots to act...
This law, like the wider anti-abortion drive, hurts women’s freedom, their health and even their lives.
It has been achieved through the relentless efforts of activists who are not merely egging on but also funding others around the world.
Meeting and defeating these challenges will require an equally committed, comprehensive and ambitious campaign. The opponents of women’s freedom will not stop. Defenders cannot either. This law will galvanise them. — The Guardian
The story said Tory peers had warned about the dangers of “judicial activism”, and the justice secretary, Robert Buckland QC, was believed to be drawing up plans for reform.
In response, David Lammy, the shadow justice secretary, said: “The Conservative government is determined to do all it can to take power away from the courts and hoard it in No 10. This is an attack not only on judges but on the British public, who rely on an independent judiciary to uphold the law. We cannot trust this chronically incompetent government with any more power than it already has.”
— The Guardian
Nah, this kinda stuff has nothing to do with the life of children. It's just punishment for women who have sex. That's it. It's pretty straightforward misogyny. Anyone who thinks these people have any concern for children has not looked paid any attention to how they treat children. Except "I fucking hate women and hope they are miserable forever if they enjoy themselves even slightly" is a harder sell than "I like unborn children". — StreetlightX
Also of course this is entirely untrue. Or at least, you just need to substitute one woman hating religion for another. Everything else is cosmetic. — StreetlightX
That's not what the people say who oppose abortion, so you've psychoanalyzed them all, including the women who hold that position and determined them all liars? — Hanover
Also maybe Americans will come to realize the supreme court as an institution is a vile, anti-democratic house of shit, no matter who sits on it, — StreetlightX
This, however, seems right on.That's it. It's pretty straightforward misogyny. Anyone who thinks these people have any concern for children has not looked paid any attention to how they treat children. — StreetlightX
Not my fault that you take these Mullahs of American Christianity seriously. — StreetlightX
whether there were legitimate grounds to regulate abortion. — Hanover
There is no debate about regulating abortion, and especially not in the US. Abortion is irrelevant to these people. The only relevant debate is how much these people want to punish women for being independent and pleasure-seeking. Again, the onus is on anyone who wants to take these people at their word. They care about children? Prove it. Because every action of theirs has one goal only: to punish women. Prove otherwise. — StreetlightX
It's irrelevant if their objective is to punish women or if they are the most honorable among us — Hanover
It certainly isn't irrelevant to the women whose lives are continually ruined by these laws. But sure, treat it as a cute little academic debate while taking the word of fundamentalist misogynists for granted. — StreetlightX
Flame much? — Hanover
And, given the composition of the court, that such decisions are likely to be repeated whenever a law that is constitutionally questionable but politically or socially agreeable to the Justices is before them. — Ciceronianus
Ignorance breeds monsters to fill up the vacancies of the soul that are unoccupied by the verities of knowledge. — Horace Mann
But this law can fairly be characterized as a grotesque parody of such laws, cynically adopted to grant standing to sue where it normally wouldn't exist, imposing a statutory minimum for damages to be awarded (more a fine or forfeiture than actual damages, which would have to be proved), and hamstringing the possibility of a defense if not precluding one ab initio.
There's something loathsome about this law; something disturbing about its contrivance. — Ciceronianus
Kristin Ford, acting vice-president of communications and research at the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws (Naral) Pro-Choice America advocacy group, condemned the way the six states scrambled to consider the legislation with such urgency after the Texas law went into effect...
Ford said this was a product of increasingly radicalized rightwing rhetoric. — The Guardian - Republicans in 6 states rush to imitate
Within a day of the law going into effect, six other states – North Dakota, Mississippi, Indiana, Florida, South Dakota and Arkansas – have said they are looking to adopt a similar ban, according to numerous reports.
An Arkansas abortion rights advocate told the Guardian on Friday she was prepared to fight such a law if it were to happen in the state.
“Legislation that mirrors Texas’s new law will harm pregnant Arkansans in need of abortions and we will not stand for it,” said Ali Taylor, co-founder and president of the Arkansas Abortion Support Network. “The fight is far from over.”
She added that if such legislation were to be passed, her organization would continue providing access to legal abortion for their clients.
“This will include helping people access abortion in Arkansas before six weeks and helping people go out of state when they are past the [legislative] gestation limit,” she said. “We will not be intimidated.”
... — As above
Lifetime tenure
Critic Larry Sabato wrote: "The insularity of lifetime tenure, combined with the appointments of relatively young attorneys who give long service on the bench, produces senior judges representing the views of past generations better than views of the current day." Sanford Levinson has been critical of justices who stayed in office despite medical deterioration based on longevity. James MacGregor Burns stated lifelong tenure has "produced a critical time lag, with the Supreme Court institutionally almost always behind the times." Proposals to solve these problems include term limits for justices, as proposed by Levinson and Sabato as well as a mandatory retirement age proposed by Richard Epstein — Wiki - the Supreme Court of the US
They're both in the dark - expect some fumbling, stumbling, falls, cuts and bruises, the ongoing Texas circus show is just another way ignorance manifests itself. — TheMadFool
Even if the ad hom attacks were correct it would have no bearing on whether there were legitimate grounds to regulate abortion. — Hanover
Maybe you can explain to us what you yelling at Hanover from the other side of the world does to help the women of Texas. — Srap Tasmaner
I think it should be characterized as craven by anyone, regardless of their feelings on abortion. And, given the composition of the court, that such decisions are likely to be repeated whenever a law that is constitutionally questionable but politically or socially agreeable to the Justices is before them. — Ciceronianus
No I don't think that's the case. The defendant can't obtain reimbursement for the defendant's costs and fees if the defendant manages to prevail, though. — Ciceronianus
In addition to a $10,000 penalty, SB8 would saddle violators of the law with their opponents’ attorneys fees. It provides no such relief for defendants, even if they win.
Maybe you can explain to us what you yelling at Hanover — Srap Tasmaner
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.