Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 358 posts

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#141

Post by the_only_law »

bruceb wrote: post #137
bullfightonmars wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gay rights and gay marriage equality was one of the top culture war issues that Republicans were fighting against from the late 90s until Obergefell. It’s a best hit. They will definitely bring it back.

Now isn't then, then isn't now. There are no on going marches against gay sex or marriage. Abortion is a on going divisive battle that goes beyond most issues. This being said there are lot of R politicians who secretly hate this potential ruling. They want to say a few words about being pro-life, raise some money and thats it. They don't want the blow back of abortion actually becoming illegal.

> This being said there are lot of R politicians who secretly hate this potential ruling

I’m getting pretty tired of watching what might as well be 4+ parities pretend to be 2.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#142

Post by capguy255 »

rayiner wrote: post #90
purple_ferret wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who cares. The supreme court has lost all credibility and has become just another political arm.

It takes some mental gymnastics to say that elective abortions to 24 weeks is a “human right” that’s so important it must be read into the Constitution—implying that countries like France, Denmark, Germany, Italy, and Spain are violating human rights by limiting abortions to the first trimester. But to go further and say the Supreme Court “has lost all credibility” by returning US law to the international norm—where…

This is the same court that is very likely to find a "human right" to conceal a firearm, despite that premise being contrary to international norms and also contrary to legal historical in America.

In short, America is soon going to switch from a system where a pregnant woman has a human right to self-preservation and instead in many states the life of the unborn child will be privileged over the pregnant woman which is rather far outside international norms.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#144

Post by rayiner »

aaomidi wrote: post #120
Mountain_Skies wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Supreme Court isn't banning abortion. It's moving the issue from the federal level to the state level. It will be members of state legislatures and their governors who will be banning abortion and obviously not in all states.

This is such a bad faith argument I don't even know how to cover it. People are gonna die because of this and you're here AXTUALLTIing this?

I think you’re the one making a bad faith argument. “People are going to die” because democrats let the ETC expire. That’s the nature of legislation. Pretty much all of it is impactful enough that you can come up with a body count.

But at the end of the day the rule of law and the process matters. Roe prohibited Americans from banning second trimester abortions, which most Americans think should be banned, and which most liberal European countries do ban. It was substituting the moral views of an elite against the judgment of the public on a fundamental moral line drawing issue.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#145

Post by [deleted] »

refurb wrote: post #118
capguy255 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think it's a good thing that the judiciary is an ivory tower with absolutely no regard for public perception? These nine people are unelected and appointed to their positions for life. They are insulated from political pressure by the other branches of government. But it is incredibly damaging to a democratic republic if government is unaccountable to the people. Not to mention, the basic premise of THIS OPINION…

You think it's a good thing that the judiciary is an ivory tower with absolutely no regard for public perception? Yes! That the entire point of the Supreme Court. It’s amazing how many comments don’t even understand basic civics and how the US government is structured.

[deleted]

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#146

Post by rayiner »

hindsightbias wrote: post #125
rayiner wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like Roe, Obergefell would be another decision where if the Supreme Court overruled, it would simply make the law the same as Europe: https://eclj.org/marriage/the-echr-unanimously-confirms-the-... Likewise in affirmative action. You just listed three things where the supposedly arch conservative Supreme Court is simply making our law the same as France.

They’re just getting started. 30 days: http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/SB... South Dakota is working on 5 weeks. There are something like a 100 state bills in work this year.

And abortion is illegal in Poland, and was illegal in Ireland until recently. So what? Somehow the folks in France manage to be part of the same EU as the folks in Poland without getting too worked up about abortion laws that don’t affect them.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#147

Post by tbrownaw »

xeromal wrote: post #111
ceejayoz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it a “wow” that you find it here, in that case?

Because hackernews is a tech website. Just a strange place for this topic to come up even if the leak might have been technological in some regard.

The initial discussion at least was about the leak itself -- who might benefit, what impact it might have -- rather than the decision that was leaked.

That's a kind of technical nerdery despite having nothing to do with computers. And it's interesting, and fun to (argue|watch arguments) about.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#148

Post by kadoban »

xeromal wrote: post #107
ceejayoz wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This decision is disregarding what process? Stare decisis, aka precedent. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/is-roe-v-wade-settled-la... "During his confirmation to the Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh convinced Sen. Susan Collins that he thought a woman’s right to an abortion was 'settled law,' calling the court cases affirming it 'precedent on precedent' that could not be casually overturned."

There was also precedent for defending slavery, women's right to vote, and other things but that didn't stop us from progressing or degressing(?) depending on what side you're on.

You really needed to preserve your neutrality for the pro-slavery, anti-suffragette crowd? There is such a thing as having too open of a mind.

> degressing(?)

regressing ("deteriorating" or "degenerating" could also work)

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#149

Post by parrellel »

rayiner wrote: post #139
slg wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to either be extremely naive or totally oblivious of the current political climate in the US to think this ends with only a ban on abortions after 24 weeks.

No, I think “this ends up” the same way as Europe: most places get a ban at the end of the first trimester, when the fetus has a face and can suck its thumb. Some states ban it or near ban it, like Poland or Ireland until a couple of years ago. A handful of blue states end up with abortion until birth.

Alito is literally calling out gay marriage and contraception as on the chopping block in that thing. I think this ends up someplace very very ugly very quickly.
Post reply on HN