Well, it's the direction a minority of the people want to go. Course, they're utterly shameless when it comes to exploiting long-standing norms and conventions so they're punching well above their weight. They're also good at destroying democratic institutions when it results in them holding onto power. It really sucks.If this is the direction America wants to head in, I will celebrate its collapse.
Pat Robertson came out against Alabama's new law?
What is this timeline?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/reli...mas-abortion-ban-is-extreme-has-gone-too-far/
>Most observers expect the Supreme Court to take up abortion bans that are less sweeping than Alabama's, such as cases involving abortion bans at 20 weeks or a law reducing the number of abortion clinics, incremental steps that could eventually lead to a major challenge of Roe v. Wade.
Richard Garnett, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, said in an email that Alabama's proposal will likely not be considered by the Supreme Court when the justices could consider less dramatic measures, such as limiting late-term abortions or abortions targeting disabilities. The justices, Garnett said, "might well prefer to first consider less sweeping abortion regulations and to uphold them even under the current doctrine."
Joke's on you, she doesn't even have any children.This dried-up oxygen thief's daughters and grand-daughters won't have to worry about this, because if they ever needed an abortion they would be sent on a 'spa trip' to NY or CA.
Conservatives are terrorists. Treat them as such
>
David Lauter @DavidLauter
Alabama officials hope their abortion ban will prod the Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v. Wade, but the justices don't seem in any mood to move fast on abortion, @DavidGSavage reports. https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-supreme-court-abortion-roe-overturn-20190515-story.html …
The court, behind closed doors, is about to discuss -- for the 14th time -- whether to consider Indiana's abortion law, which federal courts have put on hold. CJ Roberts prefers to move slowly as he pushes the law to the right. https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-supreme-court-abortion-roe-overturn-20190515-story.html …
7:13 PM - May 15, 2019
This all checks out. Roberts is one of those "appearances" conservatives who prefers chipping away at our rights over a long stretch of time rather than enact a ban outright. He's all about shifting the policy window rightward in a way that appears "moderate".
>
David Lauter @DavidLauter
Alabama officials hope their abortion ban will prod the Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v. Wade, but the justices don't seem in any mood to move fast on abortion, @DavidGSavage reports. https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-supreme-court-abortion-roe-overturn-20190515-story.html …
The court, behind closed doors, is about to discuss -- for the 14th time -- whether to consider Indiana's abortion law, which federal courts have put on hold. CJ Roberts prefers to move slowly as he pushes the law to the right. https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-supreme-court-abortion-roe-overturn-20190515-story.html …
7:13 PM - May 15, 2019
Congratulations on encouraging anti abortion movements in the whole world and making it worse for women...
Friendly reminder that you can't ban abortions, you just ban safe abortions.
Short of economic ruin and famine?
Yes, there are federal laws, but this type of thing is dealt with by the states.Why are there not some sort of "unbreakable laws" that the federal government could enforce and that could not be challenged by state laws?
Yeah. This honestly doesn't help the narrative for Republicans at all with them trying to kill Roe vs Wade with a thousand cuts.It's more that he's worried that this challenge will lose because it looks awful.
Yea, if the goal was to get this to the Supreme Court they jumped the shark with this. They went too far and it wont get certedWhy would the Supreme Court grant cert for something this easily dismissed? I feel like this could be shut down at the appellate level and it shouldn't go any further.
Yes, there are federal laws, but this type of thing is dealt with by the states.
No it's just plausible deniability until they can institute federal prison time for women who abort for any reason, until then they need to pretend that these draconian measures go too far to maintain a cover because that position is too unpopular to jump into the deep end with and won't win or will mobilize enough of a counter point to end it. They know if they "appear" to be against it that it also raises the chances that people do nothing about it because they'll see that and make a logical leap to assume that it'll be handled "internally".
No it's just plausible deniability until they can institute federal prison time for women who abort for any reason, until then they need to pretend that these draconian measures go too far to maintain a cover because that position is too unpopular to jump into the deep end with and won't win or will mobilize enough of a counter point to end it. They know if they "appear" to be against it that it also raises the chances that people do nothing about it because they'll see that and make a logical leap to assume that it'll be handled "internally".
The point is to start with finding their golden goose to get high enough through the courts to get to the federal and end Roe, anything else until then risks that strategy.
To the bill's many supporters, this legislation stands as a powerful testament to Alabamians' deeply held belief that every life is precious and that every life is a sacred gift from God."
So you will get rid of the death penalty and ban assault weapons?
People voted her into office, where she refused to have 1 single debate with her democratic opponent. She played the "keep away" card all the way to victory...
People voted her into office, where she refused to have 1 single debate with her democratic opponent. She played the "keep away" card all the way to victory...
Around here? Hell yes, people are pledging to not vote if Biden is the nominee.