Roe vs Wade has been overturned.

submitted by iamonlyoneman from (supremecourt.gov)

all 6 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]scornedandsedated 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Great. More "mostly peaceful" assholes destroying cities in the name of human rights. It's gonna be a long, hot, summer boys and girls.

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think there will be less of that, by a lot, because the antagonists in this case are women, and women are notoriously less violent than men

[–]noshore4me 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It really sucked the wind out of this weekend's pride events.

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Held: The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.

[–]IkeConn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Finally red states have a poison pill to discourage lefties from moving to their states. I think red states should not only make abortion illegal they should make it illegal to leave the state to get an abortion under threat of a 15 to 25 year stretch. Then they'll never move here.

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A few choice quotes because people are not inclined to read long decisions:

Roe was on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was decided, Casey perpetuated its errors ... wielding nothing but “raw judicial power,” ...the Court usurped the power to address a question of profound moral and social importance that the Constitution unequivocally leaves for the people.

...Together, Roe and Casey represent an error that cannot be allowed to stand.

Roe found that the Constitution implicitly conferred a right to obtain an abortion, but it failed to ground its decision in text, history, or precedent. It relied on an erroneous historical narrative; it devoted great attention to and presumably relied on matters that have no bearing on the meaning of the Constitution; it disregarded the fundamental difference between the precedents on which it relied and the question before the Court ...Roe’s reasoning quickly drew scathing scholarly criticism, even from supporters of broad access to abortion.

...Roe’s failure even to note the overwhelming consensus of state laws in effect in 1868 is striking, and what it said about the common law was simply wrong. Relying on two discredited articles by an abortion advocate, the Court erroneously suggested—contrary to ...and a wealth of other authority—that the common law had probably never really treated post-quickening abortion as a crime.

Finally, after all this, the Court turned to precedent. Citing a broad array of cases, the Court found support for a constitutional “right of personal privacy,” but it conflated two very different meanings of the term: the right to shield information from disclosure and the right to make and implement important personal decisions without governmental interference.

...Roe did not provide ... justification for the lines it drew...And the Court did not explain why it departed from the normal rule that courts defer to the judgments of legislatures “in areas fraught with medical and scientific uncertainties.”

the United States as amicus curiae asked the Court to overrule Roe five times in the decade before Casey, and then asked the Court to overrule it once more in Casey itself.