I need a distraction from the thought of having to go to work tomorrow 🥲

@sarabee1995 I want to discuss the Supreme Court.

@JustGoneNow Sure! Go for it! 👂

@sarabee1995 can anyone join in this non conversation?

@sarabee1995 I think when we lose the use of prior precedent and judicial restraint, we are very close to losing the legitimacy of the courts.

@JustGoneNow I agree that ignoring precedent is dangerous, but should not judicial review be allowed to evolve? Adapt?

@Yulianna Of course!!

@sarabee1995 of course, but incrementally, as Roberts suggested and the rest of the Conservative judges ignored.

@sarabee1995 as to not cause a crisis of law, and with full respect for precedent as established by prior rulings and backed up over years.

@JustGoneNow Agreed. I'm a Roberts fan. Right-of-center but not crazy.

@sarabee1995 he has great judicial philosophy… and most of all, he’s consistent. You can’t be strict constitutionalist on Monday and a interpretationalist on Tuesday because it suddenly fits your judicial activism better. A sound and consistent judicial philosophy is best otherwise judges end up looking like politicized hacks and political activists, not interpreting law but actually instead deciding it.

@JustGoneNow Agree 100%! Both on your observations of him and of your opinions on judicial review in general.

@sarabee1995 I love you. 🖤🖤🖤

@JustGoneNow I don't think you need to worry about them, I don't think they'll be taking any more rights away, as started in their comments, which said this was just a rare case, where they thought needed the be corrected.


And yes, there is that wild one that wants to take a lot of rights away, but it seems even the other conservatives are no where near that position... and think pretty much everything else is settled.

@Viper that’s not the way law works. This has set it’s own precedent based on how it was argued, that will far out reach this case. I suggest you read Roberts opinion. It’s a bell weather.

@JustGoneNow Yes, but some of the other Conservative judges opinions basically said this is an extreme exception and basically they don't see over turning anything else.

@Viper they can say that all day long but that’s not the way the law works and everyone knows it. They can hope it doesn’t call into question other cases that used the opinions of Roe v Wade’s original decision as the precedent for their own (and other cases that they personally don’t take issue with,) but precedent is a funny thing and judgements are always used to justify new future judgements, as they get decided. Judgements set precedent not in the yes or no of the actual decision but in the opinions of how it was decided, and this sent dangerous ripples through through the entire legal community. This decision (in it’s opinion) literally calls into question all of the unenumerated rights that we enjoy that are not explicitly stated in the constitution unless they are "deeply rooted in this nation's history and tradition." Judge Alito argues that the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . . . has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such rights must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” . . . And argues that the right to an abortion does not fall within this category.
You know how long abortion rights were the law of the land decided by Roe v Wade? 49 years. Nearly 50 years of the nation’s history and tradition. You know what unenumerated right has little to no time as decided law (for history and tradition) within our nation? Obergefell v Hodges which was decided just seven years ago and guarantees the right of gay people to be married.
Moderate Conservative Supreme Court justice Roberts (whom I have huge respect for) tried unsuccessfully to urge judicial restraint on this latest decision and said… "If it is not necessary to decide more to dispose of a case, then it is necessary not to decide more." Because using the Dobbs v. Jackson case to re-litigate an already decided Roe v Wade case causes major issues legally to many other decisions and cases.