the difference is the gun rights case is clearly stated in the constitution as federal law so that case was based on a written law, the abortion case was based on a court case/opinion. since the original passing of roe each court session has said that congress needs to pass a federal law and each congress has tried. now that the roe opinion has been struck down maybe congress will get serious about passing a federal law.
@LordShadowfire no i am saying a case was brought before them that they ruled on. they did not seek the case it was brought to them they heard the case and made a ruling on it which is word for word what each justice has said they would do
@LordShadowfire even RBG said there were mistakes in the writing of roe and the point of my post is now maybe congress will get serious about making abortion a federal law which they have been weakly attempting since 1972 it was never serious for them because they could stand on roe without risking political clout by voting one way or the other now that roe is gone federally they will have to do something for real.
No, they decide what is constitutional and what is not. In the NY case, they correctly interpreted the words "shall not be infringed" and struck down the law. On Roe, they correctly judged that abortion is not an enumerated power of the federal government and falls under the purview of the 10th Amendment. It would help if you had actually ever read the Constitution. Supreme Court/American people 2, leftists 0.
SW-User
@DCarey I would interpret the score as SCOTUS/White men 2, Women/children 0
@Fukfacewillie To be fair, the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to ban abortion nationwide. But you're right, if a national ban is imposed, suddenly "states' rights" won't apply.
Nothing unusual about that. That was par for the course with the Lochner court. Worker's rights? No, only the federal government can do that. Restrictions on workers? Sure, states' rights prevail.
The Roberts court will be remembered the way the Lochner and Taney courts were. At least Roger Taney never pretended to be anything other than a racist POS.
They need child sacrifices for their blood God yahwack. I mean they are the ones after all that have been running a 2000 year pedophile child sacrifice ring. Over 200,000 child molestation cases since the 50s. And how many mass graves of native children so far? This is the future scotus wants:
@LordShadowfire Four of whom were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote, and confirmed by senators who represented a minority of Americans.
SW-User
Dumbass post of the day.
SW-User
@SW-User And yet so many people agree. You realise this is going to backfire on the Republicans badly. I think this will guarantee Democrats expand their majorities in both chambers and will get the votes to expand the SCOTUS 😎
SW-User
@SW-User My reply to you has nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans. It's just about you being an ignorant fuck.
