How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare • Hacker News Board

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

#201

Post by TimTheTinker » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:46 AM UTC

Maursault wrote: post #151

rayiner wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> It takes some mental gymnastics to say that elective abortions to 24 weeks is a “human right” No one ever said that... and apparently you've entirely missed the ProChoice argument. Does a government have the right to prevent you from having an appendectomy? Where does the government end and you begin? ProChoice is about limiting absolute government authority, like, over your cells and junk. btw the rights in questi…

Your remarks are a good summary of pro-choice arguments.

There are also credible pro-life arguments. The 14th amendment's Equal Protection clause is arguably provides the strongest legal basis for banning abortion: "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

So the legal question is whether a baby that hasn't yet been born is a person - if so, their life ought to be protected by state laws in the same way they protect anyone else's life.

It's a pretty straightforward question - is this baby an individual human being or not? I for one can't accept that I wasn't me while I was yet inside my mom (we know scientifically that after fertilization, I was a distinct human from my mom and dad) - and I see no reason to deny that personhood to fellow people. Answering in the affirmative, and various reasons for such an answer, forms the basis of the pro-life view.

Zooming out a bit, pro-life people see abortion as a modern analog to slavery in the US (where enslaved African-Americans were viewed as 3/5 of a person), except that unborn babies are viewed as not a person at all -- and this framing is used to justify killing them, not merely enslaving them and denying them the right to vote.

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

#202

Post by TearsInTheRain » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:50 AM UTC

KerrAvon wrote: post #186

usernomdeguerre wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Releasing a draft stops many avenues of compromise among the decision makers. Regardless of the industry/institution. When members do not have a way to change their opinion and save face, they won't change their opinion. Politico should have been more thoughtful about its disclosure if they preferred to see changes because now the names on that opinion will never change and we could very well see the exact language b…

That’s incredibly unrealistic in this case. All the conservatives could die satisified the day after this decision is final. They’d have served their ultimate purpose to the cause to which they dedicated their entire lives. This is the one thing they were put on the court to do.

No we still need them to overturn some of the ridiculous gun laws in places like NYC.

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

#203

Post by quantified » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:50 AM UTC

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…

It’s lost credibility by becoming a political arm, regardless of and prior to this decision.

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

#204

Post by TearsInTheRain » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:52 AM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #191

What if this is a Russian leak? Hear me out before you shred... A big part of Russia's game has been to try to divide the US politically. Well, this is probably the single biggest hand grenade they could have thrown into the middle of our society. And it's at a time when they'd really love to distract us from what they're doing in Ukraine. So they have motive. It fits their MO. Do they have the means to breach the Su…

Would be interesting if that was the case but Occam's razor says that this was just a disgruntled clerk

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

#205

Post by pdonis » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:54 AM UTC

ModernMech wrote: post #200

pdonis wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The arguments here are very well documented. What arguments? The parent to my post didn't make an argument, they made a claim unsupported by argument. If the claim is so obvious, it should be simple to post a sentence or two of supporting argument instead of me having to guess what they're talking about.

I think it's self evident. When abortion is made illegal it's not eliminated it's just made unsafe. People resort to unsafe abortive methods which will result in more dead women along with the fetus. Banning abortion also means that when one does need an abortion for medical reasons, it's difficult or expensive to have one, which will result in fewer women seeking a lifesaving abortion. That America lacks socialized…

> The Mississippi law was written for a world where Roe is still active. This opinion eviscerates Roe. Mississippi has a "trigger law" already on the books for just this occasion, and it will place a total ban on abortion as soon as the opinion is issued.

Ah, I see. Thank you for providing these critical details.

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

#206

Post by zdragnar » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:55 AM UTC

KerrAvon wrote: post #187

cudgy wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are not really vulnerable to populist attacks of hypocrisy or flip-flopping or whatever. They are humans that have to live in society just like the rest of us. No one is completely invulnerable to society. I imagine being the target of some of these radical abortion groups (anti or pro) would be scary, especially for officials that are normally not in the limelight.

Tell me more about these radical pro-abortion groups of which you speak. I’d really love to know if there’s an equivalent to the violent murderers on the right wing.

Last estimate I'd heard of abortions since Roe v. Wade is 60 million. I haven't a clue how accurate it is, but let's use it as an example.

Pro-life / anti-abortion people believe that a fetus is a unique human life; from their perspective, that's 60 million murders committed against the unborn.

Of course, for any who do not think a fetus is a living human, it is a hollow argument.

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

#207

Post by quantified » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:59 AM UTC

TimTheTinker wrote: post #201

Maursault wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It takes some mental gymnastics to say that elective abortions to 24 weeks is a “human right” No one ever said that... and apparently you've entirely missed the ProChoice argument. Does a government have the right to prevent you from having an appendectomy? Where does the government end and you begin? ProChoice is about limiting absolute government authority, like, over your cells and junk. btw the rights in questi…

Your remarks are a good summary of pro-choice arguments. There are also credible pro-life arguments. The 14th amendment's Equal Protection clause is arguably provides the strongest legal basis for banning abortion: "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." So the legal question is…

If you’re attached by an umbilical cord and that dependent on the womb’s environment, you are in no way individual.

If I hadn’t made it out alive, I wouldn’t care about a thing, same as I won’t care 70 years or so from now. Would have been fine with not experiencing the life I’ve had.

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

#208

Post by johnnyanmac » Tue, May 03, 2022, 6:15 AM UTC

ModernMech wrote: post #188

spoils19 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few points: * It reads like an incredible conspiracy theory that the makeup of the court has been engineered. In addition, abortion has been hotly contested and debated, even from just looking at this site. Gay marriage is far less so, and I'm willing to bet that even the most conservative poster on this site would not be against gay marriage. There isn't simply a reason to be against it. * Even if it were true, sa…

> It reads like an incredible conspiracy theory that the makeup of the court has been engineered. It's not a conspiracy theory or a theory at all. You just had to listen and watch what they were doing for the past 20 years. It's not a conspiracy to have a long term project that you telegraph to everyone by campaigning on it. That's called a political platform. It's not some shadowy thing they've done in private; they…

>You just had to listen and watch what they were doing for the past 20 years.

in all fairness, that is prime conspiracy narrative. "just follow the line of strings and it all makes sense!".

The US has been in a swing between the two parties for the past 40 years. to suggest that there's been some kind of plan to fill the courts up an convince the country to overturn a previous ruling would only be possible if you believe the opposing party was in cohoots with the plan. Which is a conspiracy level take that I'd need signifigant, official documents to be swayed on.

Occam's razor still supports your point while keeping the story simple: there's been decades of swing votes with each party getting a justice in over the decades. with the last case happening right towards the end of a controversial president with a controversial 2016 and 2020 election period.

It's a platform, sure. But I think this comes down to a series of happensstance for their plans lining up rather than some carefully crafted web of plans like some sort of thriller movie. We don't need to turn into reddit and make things out to be some grand conspiracy to discuss a topic

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

#209

Post by seanp2k2 » Tue, May 03, 2022, 6:17 AM UTC

chanakya wrote: post #106

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.

The attitude which results in this kind of extreme rhetoric and unjustified bashing of institutions will lead to the decline of the US. For a civilization to remain strong and flourish, it has to have some confidence in itself.

What if many don’t see it as unjustified? Given how the last few confirmations have gone, politicians seem to have even less respect for this institution in particular. They’ve shown the citizens how they will fight tooth and nail for every last drop of power they can grab onto. We will not remain strong and flourish; we’re more likely to have another civil war in the next few decades.

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

#210

Post by slg » Tue, May 03, 2022, 6:23 AM UTC

TimTheTinker wrote: post #201

Maursault wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It takes some mental gymnastics to say that elective abortions to 24 weeks is a “human right” No one ever said that... and apparently you've entirely missed the ProChoice argument. Does a government have the right to prevent you from having an appendectomy? Where does the government end and you begin? ProChoice is about limiting absolute government authority, like, over your cells and junk. btw the rights in questi…

Your remarks are a good summary of pro-choice arguments. There are also credible pro-life arguments. The 14th amendment's Equal Protection clause is arguably provides the strongest legal basis for banning abortion: "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." So the legal question is…

>Zooming out a bit, pro-life people see abortion as a modern analog to slavery in the US (where enslaved African-Americans were viewed as 3/5 of a person), except that unborn babies are viewed as not a person at all -- and this framing is used to justify killing them, not merely enslaving them and denying them the right to vote.

I would argue the better slavery analogy is taking away the bodily autonomy of one individual and forcing them to go through an unwanted and dangerous process for the sole benefit of another individual. That would be like making it a legal requirement for us all to regularly donate bone marrow. Even if we acknowledge the fetus as a person, my rights over my body should still supersede anyone else's rights over my body.