Given how widely disperate law can be from state to state in the US, I don't see returning the ruling to the state level doing anything whatsoever to achieve a moderate stance.
Considering every challenge to Roe comes from states, one of which is allowing uninvolved third parties to act as bounty hunters, why do you think this will lead to moderate positions?
Roe was a radical power grab from the Federal government... that politically served me in many ways. But you know equal and opposite reactions. The decision drove some people bonkers. Some even engaged in terrorism.
And you think that *this* Supreme Court, formed by stalling one candidate for 8 months while rushing through another in 8 *days* is evidence that radical power grabs are a thing of the past why?
It won't considering Roe vs Wade is getting repealed on behalf of the extremists.
I don't believe they do. I've seen two types of statistics used to justify such a claim. The first are the claims about how much abortion there was before banning/legalization, which I've never seen a source where the numbers for illegal abortions when it's banned don't seem to be absolutely pulled directly out of somebody's butt with just a hope that nobody will sniff test it. The other type is comparing abortion rates in nations with/without abortion bans, which find curiously similar rates per capita between developed countries with negative birth rates and 3rd world nations with alarming numbers of pregnant children, and never bother to question if there are other factors at play, lest it hurt the argument.
How was it a power grab? If anything it loosened power since it prevented the government, state or federal from invading a womans body?
It means that Christians can't have the control they want over other people. Thus, the issue is that Christians should never have had the power to do what they did in the first place. But, as can be seen in numerous occasions, with a variety of issues, when someone loses power they never should have had in the first place, its classed as a power grab
Well, it's because they want small government for themselves. It's those other people who need to be controlled- they're what's wrong with this country!
That is what the courts are for. To reign in the other parts of government and the states.
They'll call it state rights as the 'small government.' Because the states are well known for respecting people's rights
That has worked how well over the last 250 years? The US court generally does not find in favor of the little people
It won't matter who is repealing it as long as it gets repealed. More below.
I don't think the right has used the Judiciary to hallucinate its political prefernces into law since at least the 19th Century. And as stated above, it doesn't matter who repeals Roe, as long as this escapade in judicial hi jinks is over-turned and we can work on doing this the representative way.
In a pro-life state, I used to have the right to outlaw a process I saw as murderous, racist, evil and socially destructive. Then, suddenly, without new legislation created by representative government and no clear imperative in enumerated law, 200 year old law was used as justification for brand new totalitarian restriction of this former power of the US individual.
Not really. That only works if the population are the ones who decide and they don't. The electoral college, voter suppression and gerrymandering can grant power to uniquely disliked politicians quite easily. They managed to nominate and install religious zealots on the supreme court exactly because popular support isn't very relevant in achieving power.
It kinda does. Its getting repealed by religious extremists because they know fellow religious extremists are in positions of power to make use of it.
I wrote earlier that Roe, even though I think it judicial nonsense, serves me. It is a huge wedge issue against me that the decision eliminated. Now it is back and I don't think that is going to serve my preferred positions outside this issue.
