• @HandBreadedTools
    link
    English
    01 year ago

    And you strike me as an originalist. Don’t go after my legal knowledge like you think you know how much I do or don’t know. I’ve read every majority, minority, and concurring opinions from Griswold, Roe, Lawrence, Planned Parenthood v Casey, Lawrence, Windsor, Obergefell, and, of course, Dobbs.

    The arguments presented for Dobbs, were exclusively Christian fundamentalist. It relied on literally 0 actually substantial claims, it was clearly a case that SCOTUS already made up its mind for.

    Kavanaugh, Barrett, and even Gorsuch all specifically said they would never vote to overturn the 50 years of precedent of Roe when they were having their confirmation hearings. They swore they would not because the GOP knew of the fallout that would happen if Roe was ever actually overturned. The 2022 and 2023 elections proved them right.

    Even Clarence Thomas said he would abstain on cases like this where he has such personal feelings in his own confirmation hearings, yet he did not do so in Roe. The point I’m getting at with this is that at least 4 of the judges that voted for it have already demonstrated they’re fucking liars. How much of your word can you even take, even if you agree with them?

    Lastly, I suggest you read the concurring opinions of Dobbs. Clarence Thomas’ is especially mortifying. There is no legal argument in it, it is strictly pure hatred. If it wasn’t, and he was being consistent, he would have mentioned overturning Loving v. Virginia too, but we all know why that’s not something he’ll do.

    • @bostonbananarama
      link
      01 year ago

      And you strike me as an originalist.

      Definitely not.

      Kavanaugh, Barrett, and even Gorsuch all specifically said they would never vote to overturn the 50 years of precedent

      Did you believe them? Never had a doubt they’d vote that way.

      I’ve read every majority, minority, and concurring opinions from Griswold, Roe, Lawrence, Planned Parenthood v Casey, Lawrence, Windsor, Obergefell, and, of course, Dobbs.

      Congrats, you and every other 1L.

      Clarence Thomas’ is especially mortifying.

      For a refreshing change of pace?

      Roe was terribly reasoned and made for bad law. In the same way Dobbs was the result of starting with a conclusion and then reasoning it, so was Roe.

      A better basis for abortion access is bodily autonomy. A constitutional right to say how one’s body is used is at the heart of all other rights. That’s a much better foundation than privacy.

      • @HandBreadedTools
        link
        English
        01 year ago

        Refreshing change of place? Motherfucker Thomas’ opinion said they should “revisit” other cases like Lawrence. Obviously when he says “revisit” he means overturn. You saying that confirms literally all I need to know about your intent

        Stop trying your manipulative, disingenuous arguments here, they mean the same as the shit fascists like DeSantis say

        • @bostonbananarama
          link
          01 year ago

          Refreshing change of place? Motherfucker Thomas’ opinion said they should “revisit” other cases like Lawrence. Obviously when he says “revisit” he means overturn.

          So you have no sense of sarcasm?

          Stop trying your manipulative, disingenuous arguments here, they mean the same as the shit fascists like DeSantis say

          I’m sorry, you’re too stupid to continue this. Nothing I said was manipulative or fascistic, your reading comprehension is abysmal.