Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So, you want to reinstate anti-sodomy laws in individual states? There are an enormous set of rulings which enumerate rights not specifically granted by the Constitution, yet subject to interpretation by SCOTUS . Do you want to bring back Plessy v. Ferguson? How far do you take it? It is nowhere near as cut and dried as you think.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
oldandslow wrote:
So, you want to reinstate anti-sodomy laws in individual states? There are an enormous set of rulings which enumerate rights not specifically granted by the Constitution, yet subject to interpretation by SCOTUS . Do you want to bring back Plessy v. Ferguson? How far do you take it? It is nowhere near as cut and dried as you think.

Interesting take on my suggestion that something like the Civil Rights Act would be sufficient.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Would the Civil Rights Act have even been possible without Brown v. Board of Education? Would gay rights have advanced without Lawrence v. Texas? Do you disagree with the Windsor decision (ending DOMA)?
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Supreme Court rules that a provision of an Indiana abortion law (which said the state may prohibit abortions motivated solely by race, sex or disability) that was blocked by a lower court, should remain blocked. It allowed part of the law that requires clinics to bury or cremate fetal remains to take effect.

http://cdn.cnn.com/...28/scotus-052819.pdf

Justice Clarence Thomas agreed that the court was right not to take up the provision at this time, but said justices "soon need to confront" the issue.

He added: "Having created the constitutional right to an abortion, this court is duty bound to address its scope. In that regard, it is easy to understand why the District Court and the Seventh Circuit looked to Casey to resolve a question it did not address. Where else could they turn? The Constitution itself is silent on abortion."

So Thomas seems to want to take up the abortion issue, but other conservatives on the court didn't join his opinion.

https://www.cnn.com/...n-indiana/index.html
.
Quote Reply

Prev Next