They didn't overturn abortion, they overturned a right to privacy. Much more scary when you think of it like that
this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
1171 points (98.4% liked)
News
23655 readers
3220 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Good to see that they have.
I wish this was true but sadly it is not. Anti-choice candidates have continued to be elected and pass laws since June 2022.
I assume they're only referring to when abortion was voted on by itself, not when it was a package deal with a politician (since pretty much all Republicans are gonna be anti-choice).
That’s because you’re a good read.
Because these sheep vote for a letter next to their name. But an issue on a ballot may be backed by them but it doesn't have a letter itself, so people actually turn into individuals a bit more
Just happened in Ohio. If there were a candidate called "R-issue 1" he would have won with 53% of the vote. But since it was just "Issue 1" and it affected people, they struck it down 43-57 for-against
Anti-abortion advocates scored a big win on June 24, 2022, when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. But since then, their luck seems to have run out.
Abortion has been on the ballot in seven states since that landmark court decision one year ago and in each instance, in red states and blue states, anti-abortion advocates have lost.
In some instances, voters have approved state constitutional amendments protecting abortion rights. In others, they've rejected measures that would weaken protections or make explicit in the state constitution that abortion rights are not protected.
I hate that phrasing. Their “luck” didn’t run out. That does not describe what happened at all
Makes you wonder if the corporate elite class uses this issue (and other) just as a tool for control. Easy divide and move a population back and forth on hot push button topic. Meanwhile the top 1 percent.. investment bank continue to hoard all wealth as we see it stripped away by inflation.
I will vote for a glib, anti union, pro corporate generic candidate because he / she “strongly” supports (or not) abortion.
Yes this is a cynical take and the abortion issue is important … just cannot shake the issue is in a continual cycle to keep people divided, distracted as they get poorer and work harder.
That’s been a big chunk of the political landscape. The Republicans and the Catholics are not natural bedfellows and campaigning on Abortion has been how they pulled a ton of them to the right. If the Republicans lose the Catholic vote, they will not win for 50 years, especially since they have been counting on Hispanic anti-abortion votes to cover what they lost on the white college educated elite in the long term.
It's a shame that the SUPREME COURT is the highest court in the land.
That headline is like saying "Well our team scored the most 3-point shots" as if somehow that negates the fact that the final score is what determines who wins a game. People are trying to gloss over the fact that the SC determines the law of the land and they are simply trying to latch onto these smaller (and probably meaningless) victories because if anything gets challenged and ends up in front of the SC, it won't win.
Not at all. The majority opinion in Dodd clearly states that the issue should be decided at the state level, so even if a case somehow did make it to the SC, they would almost certainly decline to hear it since the matter, as far as they're concerned, is already settled. In that event the last ruling stands and cannot be further appealed.
they would almost certainly decline to hear it
I remember when Roe was "settled law", too. They'll hear whatever they want if it lets them achieve their political goals. Remember that at least one Justice (Thomas?) was on record basically asking for more abortion cases to get to the SC so they could decide on them. He got his wish.
That's how it SHOULD work. But the SC has given up almost every shred of impartiality.
It's a bit odd that there isn't a legal mechanism to force a Supreme Court ruling.
The supreme court doesn't make laws. Congress can protect abortion rights. Obviously elections determine the make up of Congress, but ultimately they determine who is on the supreme court too. If Trump weren't elected, protections provided by RvW would have been secure for decades.
The supreme court doesn’t make laws.
With their overturning Roe, completely ignoring precedent and redefining "standing" to include hypothetical fantasies (ala, the Web 'designer' Lorie Smith who never was asked to create a LGBTQ+ wedding website, but "might have to someday"), they are indeed making laws.
SC determines if a law is constitutional and in today's court, right wing tomfoolery is legal while everything else, no matter how sane and logical, can get struck down.
This was very obvious to many of us years back. As you said, if that clown Trump wasn't elected this would have been all a non-issue for decades.
Abortion rights do great on ballot measures, but not as well in general elections.
Yeah, most people support abortion rights, but those who oppose them are the most powerful single-issue voting block in the country.
Pro-choice people rarely base 100% of their vote on abortion. A pro-choicer who holds conservative beliefs on other issues generally votes Republican, but will vote in favor of abortion rights on a ballot measure.
Pro-lifers are different. They sincerely believe that abortion is mass murder of children, and that all other political issues combined don't matter in comparison. A pro-lifer who holds liberal views on every other issue generally votes Republican.
And yet they are inconsistent on companies that pollute air food and water. Somehow when corporations do it knowingly for the profit motive it's God's will despite causing miscarriages and birth defects en masse.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›