Supreme Court will hear direct challenge to Roe v. Wade

[In It to Win It]

Politico

The Supreme Court on Monday said it will review Mississippi’s ban on abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, taking up a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade just a few months after its newest conservative justice joined the bench.

The Mississippi ban, which has been blocked by lower courts since it was enacted in 2018, will be one of the first reproductive rights cases argued before the Supreme Court since Justice Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed in October, giving conservatives a 6-3 majority that is widely expected to curtail abortion access.

[niyad]

1. And the WAR ON WOMEN continues apace.

[SoonerPride]

2. Roe v Wade will be overturned.

If not on this case, then eventually. That's what losing Ginsburg meant to the court.

I am ready for this issue to be flipped as an activating force for our side.

[Thomas Hurt]

5. There will be one on the christofascist side as well....

they will be beside themselves and Trump will be more divine to them than he already is.

[Shrek]

6. Who is Greenburg? n/t

[SoonerPride]

10. I hadn't had my coffee yet.

Brain malfunction.

Ooops.

Fixed.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

16. For this thread

Link to tweet

[betsuni]

18. Susan will spin it as a positive, revolution-wise.

[Lovie777]

3. There are already access to illegal abortions in states that have ........

taking away the rights for a women to decide. It will only get worse.

[Bettie]

4. Of course they will

and they are likely salivating over this opportunity to deny women the right to decide what happens to their own bodies.

[Fullduplexxx]

7. But her emails right?

[betsuni]

17. And she got paid for some speeches.

[Calista241]

8. I don't know why everyone is all scared all of a sudden.

This is a good thing for us.

First, i suspect the Mississippi gambit is just too brazen to actually work. I mean, they didn't even try to disguise what they're doing. Judges and Justice's don't like to be manipulated, or even be perceived of as being manipulated, much less what Mississippi has done here, which is more of a 'you're on our side, do your job' kind of expectation. I suspect this case will not be overturned, and that they'll wait and chip away at abortion some other time down the line, which is more dangerous in the long term.

If they did overturn it, it's literally the best thing that could happen to the Democratic party. Even if it doesn't lead to an expansion of the court, it'll lead to a law being passed that explicitly allows abortion. Now, it may have some restrictions, like on late term pregnancies with a few exceptions; but overall, a national law that governs access, provides coverage, and cannot be preempted by state laws is the best possible outcome. It also gets repuke votes on the record, and some of those votes will be very surprising, both to us, their more moderate supporters, and their right winger supporters.

[lindysalsagal]

9. I hope you're right.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

12. FOH with this hot garbage.

Judges and Justice's don't like to be manipulated, or even be perceived of as being manipulated, much less what Mississippi has done here, which is more of a 'you're on our side, do your job' kind of expectation.

Dobbs sat for months until Amy Coney Barrett was seated, and then the court took it up. They know exactly what they're doing.

I suspect this case will not be overturned, and that they'll wait and chip away at abortion some other time down the line, which is more dangerous in the long term.

There is no "case" to overturn here. The court will use this opportunity to answer three questions:

(1) Whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional;

(2) whether the validity of a pre-viability law that protects women’s health, the dignity of unborn children and the integrity of the medical profession and society should be analyzed under Planned Parenthood v. Casey‘s “undue burden” standard or Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt‘s balancing of benefits and burdens; and

(3) whether abortion providers have third-party standing to invalidate a law that protects women’s health from the dangers of late-term abortions.

So what it does is chip away at abortion rights. It guts Casey and Roe, rather than overturning either of them.

If they did overturn it, it's literally the best thing that could happen to the Democratic party. Even if it doesn't lead to an expansion of the court, it'll lead to a law being passed that explicitly allows abortion.

Really interested to hear about the kind of organizing and policy work that's being doing to make this happen. Can you provide some examples?

Now, it may have some restrictions, like on late term pregnancies with a few exceptions;

*waves hands* Just a minor lil thing!

It also gets repuke votes on the record, and some of those votes will be very surprising, both to us, their more moderate supporters, and their right winger supporters.

Can you provide some examples of who might be surprises in this scenario?

[NYC Liberal]

13. Re: the last part

Zero Republicans in Congress will vote for such a law. Never, ever.

[Baitball Blogger]

11. 6-3. Do the math. The court is compromised and does not, politically, reflect

the views of the majority of Americans. Time to increase the number of long robes on the SC.

[roamer65]

14. It's not good that they going to review it.

If they let the lower court rulings stand, it would have meant no desire to gut Roe v Wade.

Women of child bearing age need to start looking into which states will be legal after the overturn.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

15. Susan Sarandon and Jill Stein must be happy

Control of the SCOTUS and Roe was on the ballot in 2016. A vote for Stein was a vote to overturn Roe