As a Supreme Court Justice, would you reverse Roe v Wade?

@OldHippie Are you referring to my question itself?

@SimplyTracie Not the question in itself. The fact that your highest court is decided on who is the most conservative or liberal instead of their unbiased expertise in the law.

@OldHippie I agree. Unfortunately we all have biases and it undoubtedly influences our decisions. We cannot really know what our forefather’s thoughts were when they framed our constitution.

@SimplyTracie true, but I don't think they thought it would end up like this.

@OldHippie I’m sure no one could predict this. How would the high court side on the issue of men cutting off their penis? Hahahah (just kidding)

@SimplyTracie Unfortunately I can see some judges say cut it off for them lol

@OldHippie My thoughts exactly. Forced castrations for all rapists and pedophiles. Maybe leave a little so they can pee. 😝

@OldHippie I agree, it's ridiculous. The U.S. Supreme Court has basically been turned into a rubber stamp for whatever legislature confirm the justices. This could be remedied by requiring a super-majority for confirmation. It wasn't that long ago that justices were confirmed almost unanimously. This would prevent obvious partisan hacks from being nominated or confirmed, which is what we have now. Instead, justices would be confirmed based on their legal expertise.

Erwin Chemerinsky, the Dean of Berkeley Law, has argued in his book [i]The Case Against the Supreme Court[/i] that aside from a few landmark decisions, the court has been a conservative institution that mostly protected the powerful from the powerless.