Scotus Friday!

Tiny Hands Trump

HR All-American
Apr 11, 2017
3,213
7,603
113
The good news is precedent doesn't matter, so take control of the court and rule however you like. Gun bans should be cool now, doesn't matter what the previous courts said.
 

Fijimn

HR Legend
May 7, 2008
11,212
18,450
113
If the bad things do not violate other constitutional rights, then the remedy is not for SCOTUS to come to the rescue.
And what does the 9th Amendment say....

Strange the GOP is in favor of rulings find that there are no privacy rights under the constitution....that the government now can get involved in all medical decisions..
 
  • Like
Reactions: nelly02

St. Louis Hawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Feb 5, 2003
27,365
49,613
113
And what does the 9th Amendment say....

Strange the GOP is in favor of rulings find that there are no privacy rights under the constitution....that the government now can get involved in all medical decisions..

Don’t confuse him with facts now.
 

mnole03

HR Legend
Mar 20, 2005
21,775
56,316
113
States cannot violate the Bill of Rights. Weird take.
The Bill of Rights only applies partially to the states through the 14th Amendment. That’s the law. It’s called incorporation.

The Court picks and chooses which rights apply.
 

SSG T

HR Legend
Gold Member
Jul 10, 2002
42,308
58,587
113
Man, you can almost pinpoint the moment this country started going into the shitter. Granted, that downhill track flattened out in the early/mid 90s, but it's been full throttle with no brakes for the last 15-18 years.

The bad part is, the bad part isn't here yet. Based on the recent decisions and how the GOP has been going sideways the last 6-7 years, in 5 years we'll look back and say "Damn, what happened?"
 

noleclone2

HR Legend
May 4, 2015
13,764
40,213
113
Pssst... our Supreme court was just hijacked by radical Christians and it's unconstitutionally destroying a secular nation.

But that shit's fine, apparently.
Yep. And the greatest part about it is due to some outdated Constitutional issues with land being over represented compared to population coupled with flat out attempts to reduce voter turnout, it is all being done with a minority of the people’s will. We are being ruled now by a subset of rural and backwards thinking goobers (many of whom suckle at the federal tit) who are getting way too many senate and electoral college votes.
 

Big Hawk D-Port

HR Heisman
Nov 29, 2004
6,220
7,065
113
The Bill of Rights only applies partially to the states through the 14th Amendment. That’s the law. It’s called incorporation.

The Court picks and chooses which rights apply.
I admit I didn’t know that. Interesting. The idea that states can violate the Bill of Rights when later amendments, including big ones like 13 (slavery abolition) 19 (sufferage), clearly apply to states, is a weird concept.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mnole03

notlongago

HR All-American
Jul 28, 2012
4,362
1,962
113
Yep. And the greatest part about it is due to some outdated Constitutional issues with land being over represented compared to population coupled with flat out attempts to reduce voter turnout, it is all being done with a minority of the people’s will. We are being ruled now by a subset of rural and backwards thinking goobers (many of whom suckle at the federal tit) who are getting way too many senate and electoral college votes.
Almost like it was designed so metros cant hold all the decision making power.....
 

notlongago

HR All-American
Jul 28, 2012
4,362
1,962
113
I think it's pretty sad that the court made a decision that %70 of the states were against.


I hate abortion, I really do. But I really think we could of come with something better than this.

We don't take care of our kids and citizens as it is, this will make it much much worse
Better? How is the state making the decision not a better solution? Its finally going to give another issue the reps will have to listen to their constituents on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: INXS83

INXS83

HR Legend
Gold Member
Jul 5, 2003
18,165
6,215
113
Hard to believe that even in this day and age, women have no control over their own bodies.
Sure they do. Don't get knocked up unless you want to conceive. This is the 21st century, even the poor have access to condoms. Be discriminating, not a farm animal. if your man won't put one on, or let you put it on for him, he isn't worth screwing.
 

Finance85

HR Legend
Oct 22, 2003
16,734
17,468
113
Down goes Roe v. Wade. More Supreme Court legislating from the bench. It's campaign season so I would expect some Republican Congressman or Senator to have a national abortion ban law on the floor by the end of the summer.
How are they legislating from the bench?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coach_Fry

Finance85

HR Legend
Oct 22, 2003
16,734
17,468
113
Obviously the 2nd Amendment is part of the federal constitution, so a right of all Americans regardless of what state you live in.

Abortion, not mentioned in the constitution, is delegated to the states per the 10th amendment.
Pretty basic concept.
 

BioHawk

HR Legend
Sep 21, 2005
38,610
39,320
113
How are they legislating from the bench?
Come on, every time I think there is actually a brain sitting behind that keyboard of yours you come up with a post like this. You need to do better than playing stupid.
 

Finance85

HR Legend
Oct 22, 2003
16,734
17,468
113
Why isn’t the 7th Amendment incorporated?
"Courts of the United States" means federal courts. The language in the amendments that have been incorporated aren't limiting, other than the religious restriction in 1A. The "congress shall make no law" phrase was corrupted by the courts because of their reliance on Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists.
 

Finance85

HR Legend
Oct 22, 2003
16,734
17,468
113
Come on, every time I think there is actually a brain sitting behind that keyboard of yours you come up with a post like this. You need to do better than playing stupid.
Answer the question if it's that basic. How is this decision legislating from the bench? What rule did the court use in this decision to distinguish when abortions are OK, or not? Tell me how this is legislating from the bench? I've read the decision. There's absolutely no rule, test, or regulation anywhere in it. How is it legislating from the bench?
 

BioHawk

HR Legend
Sep 21, 2005
38,610
39,320
113
Answer the question if it's that basic. How is this decision legislating from the bench? What rule did the court use in this decision to distinguish when abortions are OK, or not? Tell me how this is legislating from the bench? I've read the decision. There's absolutely no rule, test, or regulation anywhere in it. How is it legislating from the bench?
Because you are being a literal dunce and not looking at what the ruling effectively does. It's what people who know their position is complete bullshit do to try and justify why they support something that is clearly a wrong. Millions of people lost their right to make medical decisions today and you want to harp on the literal words of the ruling. Telling women what they can or can't do with their bodies. How "libertarian" of you.
 

WorldSeriesChamps2015

HR Legend
Gold Member
Jul 11, 2017
28,737
36,505
113
34
China
Sure they do. Don't get knocked up unless you want to conceive. This is the 21st century, even the poor have access to condoms. Be discriminating, not a farm animal. if your man won't put one on, or let you put it on for him, he isn't worth screwing.

You understand what rape is, correct?
 

Finance85

HR Legend
Oct 22, 2003
16,734
17,468
113
Because you are being a literal dunce and not looking at what the ruling effectively does. It's what people who know their position is complete bullshit do to try and justify why they support something that is clearly a wrong. Millions of people lost their right to make medical decisions today and you want to harp on the literal words of the ruling. Telling women what they can or can't do with their bodies. How "libertarian" of you.
This decision literally overturns two decisions that were legislating from the bench. This decision is the opposite of legislating from the bench because it sends the legislation back to actual legislative bodies. This decision is littered with references as to why courts aren't the proper place to decide things like when life is viable.

The SCOTUS isn't telling women what they can or can't do with their bodies. You won't find anything in this opinion that does that. The SCOTUS is saying it's a legislative matter. Roe and Casey actually did tell a woman what they can do with their bodies. Roe and Casey both have tests for when an abortion can happen. That's the very essence of legislating from the bench.

As for being Libertarian, the entire philosophy is to do whatever I want as long as I don't harm, or cause proximate harm, to someone else. Let that sink in. I don't know when a fetus becomes a person, and that's why I've never taken a strict position on abortion. I do know a fetus is viable well before it's born. At some point, abortion is causing harm to another person. I don't know when that is. My view on this is absolutely libertarian.

As long as you jump to conclusions without reading court opinions, or otherwise educating yourself, you will always be at odds with me. I really don't care what names you call me. First, it's just a message board. Second, there are a lot of message board tough guys.

When it comes to opinions, you can be right and I can be wrong. Some things aren't really opinions though. You threw out a term, I simply asked a question. Instead of getting an answer, you resorted to insults. Again, I don't care. I was trying to understand your perspective, but insulting me is never going to do that.
 

Latest posts