SCOTUS Poised to Strike Down Legal Precedent from Roe v. Wade - MeidasTouch

[ItsjustMe]

[FBaggins]

1. Almost matches my own reading

Some minor tweaks -

1 - Roberts doesn't want to "maintain a constitutional right to an abortion"... he just wants to rule as narrowly as possible and not completely blow up the Roe precedent.

2 - I think his most likely partners for a narrower ruling are Barret or Kavanaugh, not Gorsuch. Again, not on the grounds that they think Roe should stand, but on a desire not to change things too rapidly.

I suspect it will come down to how much room he'll give them. If he crafts a ruling that nowhere says that Roe must stand, but instead says that the current case does not require them to reconsider Roe... he might get one or both of them.

I agree with the reading in the OP that implies that this may be the best possible outcome at this point.

[Fullduplexxx]

3. It's what happens when dens dont vote

[housecat]

5. Oh the stench from 2/3

[ShazzieB]

6. Amy and Elena should trade places in that pic.

In fact, put Amy where Clarence is, and Clarence where Elena is. That way Handmaid Amy can be surrounded by conservative "commanders." And Elena will be over there with her other two sane colleagues.



Jokes aside, the video is very much worth watching, so thanks! Going to watch it again as soon I post this, to make sure I got all the details.

[bucolic_frolic]

7. In this age of open communication, reversing a major case could melt adherence to law

because it will be evident the law means nothing, even to those who say what the law is.