So let's look at the "what ifs" with Roe v Wade.

[realmirage]

First, it's worth noting that GOP senators Murkowski and Collins will likely vote no on judges that might overturn roe v wade. You also have to remember how difficult it is to overturn laws that have been settled, without amending the constitution because of something in law called "stare decisis." It basically means judges usually respect a previous judge's ruling (precedent). Supreme Court rulings have been overturned but it is very rare.

You also have to wonder what judges and politicians will do when the reality sets in and the rhetoric turns into the moment where they will have to take action that will result in the actual reversal of Roe v Wade. People will say and do all sorts of things to get votes or brownie points in the press that they don't really believe, so long as they feel safe that the law will not actually change. This will be a true test of what republican politicians actually believe. In my cynical view, most politicians' personal beliefs are not what they publicly declare when trying to get elected. It will be interesting to find out for once.

But let's say that Roe v Wade actually was overturned. What do you think the consequences would be? I'm not talking about outrage and how certain people will feel about it, or what will happen to women who need abortions. We all know the answer already. I mean what changes do you think would occur in government and politics? What impact on the parties?

I've read a lot of articles over the years where republican women say they vote republican despite being pro-choice because they don't believe Roe v Wade will ever actually be overturned. If it looks like that could really happen, I think there would be a wave of panic among female voters, republican and democratic. It could result in a big turnout for Democrats.

Democrats could then take back Congress and the White House. They could pass laws that fix a lot of the damage being currently done. Could it even result in 2/3 majority for Democrats so that they could nullify Supreme Court rulings? Well, in our current world we can see that nothing is too crazy to become actual reality. Trump is president. Ever think that could happen? Ever wonder what women (and men) would really do if the government took away Roe v Wade? No one knows. Again, it will be interesting to find out what people will really do when the true test comes. We haven't had very many true tests in our lifetime. People have become very complacent. I wonder what people would do if things suddenly got very real?

Another "what if" -- could overturning Roe v Wade destroy the Republican Party? If enough Republican/Independent women become permanently wary of the Republican Party, how does the Republican Party survive? Could it mean 20 years of Democratic rule?

You have to remember that something like abortion touches virtually every family. Something like this wouldn't just fade as an issue with the next news cycle. Abortion is never going to cease being an issue in the lives of families. Overturning Roe v Wade would be an earthquake, and I don't think anyone knows what the impact of that would be on U.S. politics.

Amidst all this, it's worth remembering something Gandhi said: "“When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always.”

What other what ifs do you think are plausible?

[njhoneybadger]

1. Interesting points, I've always believed secretly they didn't want it overturned

It's their best wedge issue. It probably won the election for them

[realmirage]

2. Makes me wonder

If this very real threat will destroy once and for all Republicans' best wedge issue? They throw that red meat to the evangelicals, and the moderate republicans ignore it because they don't think it will ever be overturned. This could bring an end to that.

[njhoneybadger]

4. It's the old "be careful what you wish for"

[realmirage]

8. Exactly

[Demsrule86]

16. No...you just don't get it, we lost today, and we will cobble together some sort of response and

do the best we can, but we can't fix this. It is going to take time. Those who voted for Stein, didn't vote, wrote in another candidate or big bird, have allowed the GOP to pack the courts...there is no quick solution, And they will make it harder for us to win elections, protest things...all sort of bad stuff we haven't even considered. Tomorrow is another day. We will have to try to win in 18 and 20 ...in order to stop the GOP from gutting Medicare and Medicaid...healthcare will go down next.

[realmirage]

18. I'm not saying we lost or won

I'm asking what people think the consequences would be. Nobody knows how the American people would react to an earthquake like the reversal of Roe v Wade. That's the point to consider. This wouldn't be the usual type of political defeat, this would be the political event of our lifetime.

[Demsrule86]

40. Roe V Wade has been destroyed at the state level...here in Ohio you are forced to carry a downs

child...there is no choice. It will go with barely a whimper because it is mostly gone now. While the courts are far right now...they were always lean right and allowed Roe to be dismantled at the state level.

[OliverQ]

23. Well, my thought on that is couldn't they just keep claiming

Dems will restore Roe v. Wade to keep it as a wedge issue? Might not work as well though if the Supreme Court is locked in.

But they have other wedge issues like guns to keep them riled up.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

6. I think the Evangelicals became pissed after W Bush

They had both houses and an ostensibly devout President and got a lot of nothing. Planned Parenthood still funded and Roe untouched and he allowed stem cell research.

[Demsrule86]

17. No it didn't emails and Russian won the election for them.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

3. My two thoughts

1) Don't just think about Roe. I'd expect fresh challenges to Gideon, Miranda, and possibly Brown.

2) Two basic ways Roe plays out:

- Less likely: Life begins at conception. Roe goes down in all 50 states and Griswold is gutted. We well be back before 1960. This solution would thrill evangelicals, as well as those desiring a rapid rise in white birth rates.

- More likely: We don't see this in the Constitution. The decision gets thrown to the states, about 30 of which will immediately ban. So it will be legal in places, but count on protesters being given a free hand.

[realmirage]

9. So then

what is the impact on politics after that scenario? A wave in the other direction?

[Demsrule86]

13. No, the revolution predicted by Sarandon and her minions isn't going to happen...if caging babies

doesn't do it, nothing will.

[realmirage]

15. Well we don't know yet whether caging babies did it

I think in the mid terms we'll have a better idea.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

37. I think a lot of women just don't see reproductive rights as a big issue

Many under 65 just take legal abortion and The Pill for granted. Once it is taken away, given time, there will be a counter movement.

You underestimate white resentment. Many whites that voted for Trump don't give a damn about non-white babies in cages.

[Demsrule86]

39. Well they are wrong. And since 17 % supported this policy and conservative religious

leaders were against it too...I think there are still some that won't go along with Trump. Trump has a minority of support. I doubt he can be elected again

[Algernon Moncrieff]

34. Depends

In a world where we continue to have fair-ish elections, it becomes our wedge issue for a generation.

[pstokely]

29. which states would immediately legalize abortion after an overturn?

?

[Algernon Moncrieff]

33. My best guess

Hawaii, California, Oregon, New York, Maryland, Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, DC - I'd predict it stays legal with few, if any restrictions.

Illinois, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New Jersey - I'd predict legality - but possibly with some restrictions


Alaska, Virginia, Delaware, Washington, Nevada, Pennsylvania -- I could see it going either way

I think everywhere else outright illegalizes or votes to severely restrict. Until people learn the lessons our grandmothers and great-grandmothers knew, and then the cycle will begin anew.

[lapislzi]

43. It's already legal.

You can't make it more legal.

Legislation can only take rights away, or define them more narrowly/specifically. See marriage laws at the state level.

A SCOTUS decison to overturn Roe v Wade would supersede any state-level legislation. See also, marriage laws at the state level.

[bench scientist]

5. I think this is very very bad.

Today's decision in Janus v. AFSCME overturned a 40 precedential case, violating the principle of stare decisis. Abood v. Detroit Board of Education was the law for 40 years until today.
Roe v Wade can be overturned by a conservative court
These are dark and disturbed times. I fear it will only get worse.

[realmirage]

10. Definitely could

I'm wondering what the impact of that would be on politics in the coming decades.

[njhoneybadger]

20. Yes these are dark days and it's going to get worse before it gets better

[jberryhill]

7. This is an error

“First, it's worth noting that GOP senators Murkowski and Collins will likely vote no on judges that might overturn roe v wade.”

There is no actual way of knowing to any degree of confidence whether a nominee would be substantially likely to do so.

It’s just not as simple as that.

Aside from which Collins will float on the breeze of whatever smoke is blown up her ass. She is easily misled.

[realmirage]

12. Of course we can't know

Collins has said she considers Roe v Wade to be "settled." But we all know people say and do different things. So the question is, what would the impact be on U.S. politics in the coming decades?

[jberryhill]

21. Forget politics, the impact on the economy will be tremendous

If there become fundamental inequities in basic civil liberties in relation to things like religion, marriage, procreation, ethnicity, sexual identity, etc., then large national companies are in for a world of pain.

From one perspective, having had the Supreme Court rule on marriage equality solve a huge problem for corporate America. Take a Massachusetts financial company for example. If advancement within the Boston HQ that company is determined, in part, by having worked where needed over the years including, say, the office in Atlanta, Charlotte, or Memphis, then there is a real problem afoot.

It’s almost fair at this point to suggest that Roe could be overturned on the basis of a privacy right, but that the federal government could require it to be legal under the Commerce Claise.

Discrimination, in any form, the diminution of a woman’s right of self determination - any policy or practice which works to the detriment of an individual’s pursuit of their potential on he basis of arbitrarily deeming them less than fully human - does not just penalize that individual. It penalizes the entire society economically, and adversely affects interstate commerce.

That’s not a moral principle. It’s simply a fact.

Convince them they might miss out on a dollar, and they’ll be marching beside you. We’ve already seen this sort of thing in action several times. Corporations which have actively promoted civil rights are not doing so because corporations have feelings. Corporations are run by boards whose legal duty to shareholders is to maximize ROI. They know that exclusion of classes of persons as less than human negatively impacts their ability to deliver shareholder value.

[Demsrule86]

11. No they won't. They won't do a damn thing.

[KCDebbie]

19. Women seeking abortions would become a new revenoue source for the for-profit

prison industry, much as undocumented immigrants and asylum-seekers have become...

These revenue sources are a change from the pot-smokers who were the previous revenue sources for the for-profit prison industry!

[njhoneybadger]

22. When they start locking women up shit will hit the fan. BIG TIME

[jberryhill]

24. But that's not how it worked before, and not what they would do

They would revoke the licenses of, and otherwise penalize, doctors who performed them.

[njhoneybadger]

25. Could it complicated if they went out of state?

Or would they punish both, tRump said he was for it

[pstokely]

30. what about transporting women across state lines?

will they go after gas stations selling gas to women traveling across state lines?

[KCDebbie]

31. But weren't most abortion-providers back in the day NOT doctors in the first place?

[jberryhill]

38. That was one of the problems

You might want to look into, for example, Dirty Dancing or Peyton Place. Of the two, Peyton Place is more interesting, because it was contemporary.

This whole business of “lock up the women” is something of a rhetorical red herring. Many of the anti-choicers take the line of “she’s a victim too”, and would simply penalize the provider. The end result is that women are forced into desperate and potentially life threatening circumstances by, say, the moonlighting veterinarian or “some guy at some place I can take you”. In the event of any medical complications, they are abandoned, because it is like the bank robber showing up at the ER with a gunshot wound. It is an illicit and unsafe market in medical services by questionable providers.

[KCDebbie]

44. I've always felt that one of the reasons abortion

Was decriminalized in the first place was because those Justices all knew a niece or sister or Aunt or cousin who died or did life-lasting harm to themselves trying to end an unwanted pregnancy.

I'm sure even now one could research old newspaper accounts of women who died as the result of female problems or other extremely vague activities...

[jberryhill]

45. It was very common to know someone who had been harmed in one way or another by those circumstances

I had to do something of a double-take writing that last post until my wife reminded me that people younger than 40 or 50 years old (depending on where they may have lived) are unfamiliar with the common reality of what things were like then.

[RandySF]

26. You are wrong about Collins and Murkowski.

[realmirage]

28. Didn't say the definitely would or wouldn't. But

the real question of the thread is, if Roe is overturned, what's the impact politically?

[pstokely]

27. how many pro choice republican ladies went to a women's march?

if any?

[J_William_Ryan]

35. Abortion

will still be a wedge/red meat issue for Republicans when Roe is overturned.

Most states will continue to recognize a woman’s right to privacy and not ‘ban’ abortion; and of course most of those states will be blue states.

Republicans will attempt to vilify those blue states and seek to enact Federal law ‘banning’ abortion.

Needless to say, women will continue to have abortions in states that ‘ban’ the procedure, just as was the case before Roe.

Women with means will simply travel to states that respect a woman’s right to privacy to have an abortion.

Conservatives hostile to privacy rights – in social right in particular – will continue to rail against abortion and use it as a political weapon against Democrats.

[Demsrule86]

42. There are more Republican states than Democratic states.

[c-rational]

36. In twenty years the crime rate will rise, we build more jails and incarcerate more people. Not

something to look forward to.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

41. No nominee will actually say he'll vote to overturn Roe v Wade.

It's a case by case decision. I can't answer hypothetical questions. I need to see the facts of the case. I will serve the people of the United States. etc.