I agree with @rickhasen on this, though I suspect we'd characterize Roberts' motivation and method differently
-
-
-
your suspicions would be correct.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I should know better by now than to disagree with you, Rick, but YOLOhttps://twitter.com/mikesacksesq/status/1012095124237627392?s=21 …
-
not going to matter much in practical effect
-
Right, but I think this one transcends practicalities.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Agree that chipping away is the more likely strategy: less likely to motivate Dems at state level, but still can have large effects on goal of reducing abortionhttps://twitter.com/donmoyn/status/1012041777040297986 …
-
One way the court can reduce abortions is simply redefining how they decide what state restrictions count as an undue burden. In Whole Women's Health Breyer called for evidence about costs and benefits of restrictions. Future SCOTUS can undo that formulation in a couple of wayspic.twitter.com/bCWADCGzvJ
-
First, a future SCOTUS can simply defer to legislative reasoning about whether a burden is undue or not, ignoring actual evidence on this question. In effect, this has been the standard used when considering burdens in voting casespic.twitter.com/Q4l2byhlFu
-
Second, SCOTUS could do away with a balancing test between costs and benefits when considering burdens: if the law has any benefit, no need to consider costs on women. Sounds crazy, but this was effectively the position of Thomas in Whole Women's Healthpic.twitter.com/ji59chw1fu
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You mean, kind of what Kennedy and O'Connor had been doing to it for decades.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not sure it even needs to be 1000s cuts. He’s smart enough not to chop of the head in a public spectacle, but he will quietly slit the jugular instead.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Add Chevron to the list of examples here.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yep. Quietly and slowly slide the rights out from under their feet and they will never know it. Yank them out like a rug and everyone will trip and fall and screech in fury.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
They've already done that to a large degree -- the death by a thousand cuts.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
lol if red states use the cuts to open up lacerations, is there really a difference? he knows the end result, he just doesn't want to take all the heat
-
The difference is that going after it in a low profile way over multiple cases will avoid the massive public backlash that directly overturning R v. W would cause.
-
my point is there is no "low profile"...red states will take an inch and run a mile. if the rulings give the legislative green light, there is no functional difference from scotus making the call themselves.
-
I mean, abortion rights have already been decimated over the past decade. But that didn't create massive protests because there wasn't a single dramatic event.
-
lol so if they've been decimated over the past decade, do you really think there's enough left to cut another sliver? or will the gop go for broke? i can give you a hint, but i think you know the answer(s).
-
I think it's possible the Supreme Court will use multiple cases to expand exceptions to Roe v. Wade until it effectively doesn't exist anymore. So abortion will get even more restricted than it already is, but there might not be a single dramatic ruling.
-
we'll certainly find out after this future pick gets rammed thru confirmation
End of conversation
New 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.