• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    31 year ago

    I mean it would have been redundant up until the court decided that settled law didn’t actually matter. When they had a supermajority row vs wade was a constitutionally protected right, there was no reason to spend the political capital on “settled law”.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        Then why did Dems promise year after year to codify it into law if it was settled?

        More than likely fund raising? Or it could be that pretty much every American politician is a professional liar who’s only real job is to lubricate the human crushing machine that is capitalism…

        Idk, pick your poison.

        • GodlessCommie
          link
          -61 year ago

          Find raising was the sole reason they did nothing, they sold women out to raise money

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            01 year ago

            Well yeah, they’re ghouls… of course they’d rather spend their political capital protecting business interest than use it to protect women.

            I wasn’t defending Congress in my statement about the redundancy of passing an actual law, I was just explaining their reasonings. Why pass a policy when it’s already “settled law”. If their opposition is obsessed enough to delegitimize the judicial concept of binding precedents…well we’ll just fund raise off that.

            It’s kinda brilliant if you’re a conservative or liberal, you don’t even have to pretend to be progressive anymore. America is so shrouded in conservative ideology that “progressives” are now people who fight to reestablish the status quo of 10 years ago.