Now, "super-precedent" is not a real thing in the courts. It's an academic category and Senators like using the phrase so they can pretend that Roe is beyond controversy, when they know this is not true & know every single person listening to them knows this is not true.
-
-
Show this thread
-
You can pretend, if it serves the purposes of your activism, that "super-precedent" is an actual legal category, but don't expect anyone to take you seriously.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What they want is for conservative judges to admit that it can be overturned so that the D base understands whats at stake. It's not that hard to understand.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Roe isn't even a precedent anymore, it's been essentially entirely superseded by Casey. . .
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Ew, now explain how “nobody’s trying to revisit anymore & everyone agrees on” is any different from living constitutionalism?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Gorsuch might, Kavanaugh maybe, Roberts won’t, I do think they will eventually be forced to deal with and likely approve late term bans
End of conversation
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.