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

271–280 of 358 posts

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

#271

Post by ModernMech »

emerged wrote: post #264
ModernMech wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excuse me, we're looking at a total abortion ban in half the country soon if this decision is to be the law of the land. This idea that it might be limited to a 3.5 month restriction is an old talking point that has been obviated by the news from the Supreme Court. If what was released last night comes to fruition, abortion bans predating Roe and trigger laws passed in the interim will bring full abortion bans into e…

You’re reacting to something which hasn’t actually happened. Even the 3.5 months thing hasn’t actually happened.

Not really no. It's functionally not possible to get an abortion in Tennessee now due to the laws they've been passing there. Also in Texas. Any perception that abortion rights aren't currently dissolving in this country will be laughably aged in a couple months.

So sure, I'll save the majority of my feelings for when total abortion bans are actually in effect in 20+ states across the country in mere weeks. But let's not pretend that the writing isn't on the wall.

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

#272

Post by AnimalMuppet »

native_samples wrote: post #231
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…

Quoted post unavailable.

No, the "narrative" is not based just on Clinton's claims. There's way more than that. There's research into fake social media accounts, what they do, and who runs them.

To me, the one that really stands out was when sock puppet Facebook accounts organized a BLM rally and a MAGA rally at the same time and place. That seems pretty clear what the intent was.

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

#273

Post by remarkEon »

elliekelly wrote: post #249
remarkEon wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not going to link it, because they're probably catching some significant heat already, but there's speculation it was one of Sotomayor's clerks. Scroll twitter for a bit if you're inclined and you'll find it.

Sooo a twitter rumor?

At this point, yes, just a twitter rumor.

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

#274

Post by slg »

leereeves wrote: post #254
slg wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 indivi…

Parental responsibility doesn't stop there. Parents can be jailed for failing to take care of their children; imprisoned for life if their children die through neglect or abandonment; or almost literally enslaved, told what jobs to take and have their earnings confiscated. I haven't heard anyone seriously challenging the extent of parental responsibility, only when it begins.

Except we don’t force this on people. We give parents the opportunity to opt out through adoption.

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

#275

Post by vanattab »

ceejayoz wrote: post #251
rayiner wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure—but those other rights must still exist and come from somewhere. Where does the right to abortions until viability come from?

The same place my right to pick my nose, eat creme brulee, and hug my kids come from. It doesn't have to be written down for it to be one.

But you don't have an inaliable right to creme brulee do you? If the FDA/Congress decides dairy should no longer be sold or consumed in the USA then they can pass a rule/law and it would almost certainly be upheld as constitutional. All the politicians might get thrown out by the cheese lovers in the next election. But it would be perfectly legal. The constitution I think is referring to other rights established in English common law previously?

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

#276

Post by zaccusl »

rayiner wrote: post #247
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…

Quoted post unavailable.

This is a fallacious argument until you grapple with the reality that no HUMAN has the right to use another HUMAN to sustain life. It doesn't matter if a person is a fully grown adult that can cure cancer and world hunger, or a 1 year child. That person does not have the right to use another person to sustain their own life under any circumstances.

You are arguing a strawman. The question is not if the fetus is "human" or "life".

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

#277

Post by zaccusl »

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…

"So the legal question is whether a baby that hasn't yet been born is a person"

That's not the important question. The question is can one person be compelled to use their body to sustain another persons life. We can't even force DEAD people to use their body to sustain life (i.e., a person has to consent to donate organs before they die).

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

#278

Post by zaccusl »

slg wrote: post #221
remarkEon wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the US will lose a basic right that practically all the rest of western world guarantees its citizens? This isn't true. The US is somewhat of an outlier in how liberal the abortion laws are here. What's likely is that, should SCOTUS not bow to the inevitable mob that will come after this leak, blue states keep their liberal abortion laws and red states don't. Most of the country will probably have abortion laws that…

Please reread both my comment and your comment. Do you not see how misleading your reply is? You completely left out a portion of my original quote so you could argue against a straw man. I didn't say "the US will lose a basic right...". I said "millions of people in the US will lose a basic right...". No one thinks this will result in a federal abortion ban, but over a dozen states will immediately ban abortion upon…

"No one thinks this will result in a federal abortion ban"

Nope, anybody paying attention thinks this will result in a federal ban.

Conservatives are already calling for a senate majority to specifically apply a 6 week abortion ban nation wide. And that is just the start.

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

#279

Post by [deleted] »

zaccusl wrote: post #276
rayiner wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

This is a fallacious argument until you grapple with the reality that no HUMAN has the right to use another HUMAN to sustain life. It doesn't matter if a person is a fully grown adult that can cure cancer and world hunger, or a 1 year child. That person does not have the right to use another person to sustain their own life under any circumstances. You are arguing a strawman. The question is not if the fetus is "huma…

[deleted]

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

#280

Post by Ancapistani »

capguy255 wrote: post #142
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…

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…

FWIW, I'm far more interested in the gun rights case than this one, and I don't think anyone seriously believes we'll get nationwide concealed carry out of it. The best reasonable case from my perspective is that we'll get "strict scrutiny" applied against the Second Amendment which will in turn invalidate a number of "may-issue" permit systems and perhaps some "category" bans.

I can't imagine a ruling stronger than saying "a state must provide a means for citizens to legally carry a firearm outside their home". Even in that case, there are all kinds of legal impediments that blue states would use to make it as difficult as possible.

> 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.

I'm not aware of any other major country where abortion third-trimester abortions are legal, as is the case in the US today. Most countries set the gestational limit at ~12 weeks.

Post reply on HN