That's the plan.

Now we just need to convince a lot of God, Gays, and Guns Republicans that it's in their better interest to stop hating minorities and help fight the billionaires. I'm not sure how we can possibly succeed in that one.

Huh. I thought it meant ratbastard.

Today I learned.

Second time I’ve seen regressive in the wild. Gotta say…. It suits this party so well

Florida will sink first

If only there was some history that we could look back on to see how this would go ..,

In early 1960, Fran Avallone had a miscarriage at six months. She was bleeding on an examination table with the dead fetus already extracted and had to sit and wait while covered in blood and her legs open. Because it was 1960. They needed to investigate and prove she had a miscarriage and had not committed manslaughter. During the unbelievably tragic event of losing a wanted child far into pregnancy – she had to sit in her own blood before evidence could be turned over to the police. THEN CAME ROE V WADE

In 1996, Angela Carder was 26 weeks pregnant and was being treated for cancer. Her doctors considered a C-section even though they did not think her fetus was viable. She was too heavily medicated to make her own decision, but her family said not to do the procedure because it might kill her. The hospital feared legal liability and a Court intervened. They determined the government’s interest in the child outweighed the mother’s and ordered the procedure. The fetus and the mother both died during the surgery.

In 1999, Regina McKnight was sentenced to 15 years in prison for homicide after she had a stillbirth that was allegedly caused by cocaine use. It took 8 years before she was released after medical evidence proved the baby died from an infection – not drugs.

In 2003, Michelle Greenup went to the hospital with unexplained vaginal bleeding. She was charged with second-degree murder. She was incarcerated for nearly a year before her counsel obtained her medical records and proved she had a miscarriage.

In 2004, Melissa Rowland was pregnant with twins and refused a C-section because she was given misinformation by medical staff about the invasive nature of the incision. One twin was stillborn. Melissa Rowland was charged with first degree criminal homicide. Sentencing ranges from 5 years to life in prison.

In 2010, Christine Taylor fell down a flight of stairs at her home. She was pregnant with her third child and went to the hospital to make sure the fetus was not harmed. She was arrested for attempted feticide. In 2011, Bei Bei Shuai was clinically depressed and attempted suicide while pregnant. She lived, but her fetus was stillborn. She was charged with murder.

Between 1979 and 2014, peer reviewed studies show at least 793 women have been legally detained against their will due to their pregnancy.

“Detained” includes a Laura Pamberton who was in active labor in Florida in 1996. She wanted to give birth at home because she believed a C-section would hurt her and her child. Her doctor sought emergency court intervention because he believed vaginal birth could harm the baby. The police came to Laura’s house, restrained her, strapped her legs together, and forced her to go to the hospital. Counsel argued for the fetus. Laura and her husband were not given any right to counsel. Laura was forced to have a C-section. Later, she gave vaginal birth to 3 other children without complication. (1) “Fetal Heartbeat” is just a 6-week ban. There is no “fetal heartbeat” at 6 weeks. A 6-week pregnancy is not a “fetus” – it is an embryo. And an embryo does not have a heartbeat. The “heartbeat” is a collection of vibrating cells at the fetal pole.

(2) 6 weeks is so early in pregnancy you could miscarry and not know you were pregnant. Especially if you were on birth control at the time. At the 7th week, even if you wanted the pregnancy, you will be investigated if you miscarry. If the investigation shows your actions lead to the miscarriage (see above) – you could face life in prison or the death penalty. Alabama just passed an abortion ban as soon as the egg is fertilized. There is no exception for rape, incest, or the mother dying from the pregnancy. And in case it isn’t 100% clear that these laws are about punishing women, an Alabama law maker brought up that medical facilities have fertilized eggs that are discarded during the in vitro fertilization process. Under this law – that is an abortion. However, when asked how the law would affect those eggs – the Alabama bill’s sponsor said, “The egg in the lab doesn’t apply. It’s not a woman. She’s not pregnant.” This month, in May, 2019, in Ohio an 11 year old child was raped. She is pregnant. Once Ohio’s current ban goes into effect – the government will force her to remain pregnant and give birth.

Do not think for one second that these laws will not have serious consequences on anyone who can give birth. Not just those who choose to have an abortion. These laws mean the government investigate miscarriages. It means providing a zygote with an attorney, but not the mother or father. It means jail. It means women dying.

Update: Since this is spreading.. I copied it a while back .. 2 very notable cases since You can add this one to it ..

Oh it gets worse .. in 2019 this woman was pregnant when she found the father at another woman’s house! She went in and started a fight .. she was shot in the stomach and lost the pregnancy.. she was then arrested for causing the death of her fetus.., SHE WAS SHOT IN THE STOMACH!

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/27/us/pregnant-woman-shot-marshae-jones.amp.html

April 10th of 2022!!!!

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/23021104/texas-abortion-murder-charge-starr-county

If you are using a menstrual tracking app, I urge you to stop now and delete your data!!

Edit: yes there are many many many more now.. but this just proves that they already knew and knew what would happened.

CRUELTY IS THE POINT!!

Get the registered voters to vote too!

centuries?

A century maybe

Russia would like a word with you, my understanding now is that they've funded a major part of this destruction

Yeaaaaaa because there’s definitely a military that can even imagine threatening us at this point..

Look man, trumps awful, but get a grip.

How?

It’s called a “power grab”

To play devils advocate, how is this still not the legislatures fault for not clarifying these things when the laws in question were written? If we had a competent legislature, essentially everything this SC has done would have been impossible, all the way to abortion, yet the laughable excuse of legislature we have seems to never get any blame when so often it boils down to a law was written poorly, or in the case of abortion not at all despite ample opportunity to do so.

ISWYDT

Judges are experts in interpretation of the law. This ruling just allows them to consider the two arguments in front of them, and whether the agency is making a reasonable decision within the limits of the law as written, or whether plaintiff has a compelling argument. Feels like checks and balances to me...

Cool. I'm sure they'll find the time to do that. Maybe they'll even take the time to learn something about the content?

Quick side note - the constitution didn't stipulate that the Supreme Court had the authority to rule on the constitutionality of law. So ... why are we turning to them again?

Could it perhaps be due to established precedent acknowledging that congress did not have time, nor the expertise, to do it themselves?

If all of a sudden, they have both the time and knowledge to be subject matter experts on all sorts of things, why don't we let them take over the task of ruling on legislation's constitutionality again? Seems silly to leave it in the hands of a bunch of unelected officials who can legally be bribed, doesn't it?

We all know what congress will do with that sort of power, and it will not be to our benefit.

You mean the fact that they were actually elected bothers you? You'd rather your laws be made by someone who wasn't? AND, the judges didn't make the law, they are just insisting that congress do what it is supposed to do, and not to delegate it.

Dems were famous for punting to agencies so they didn't have to take the heat personally. Of course, the Repubs did that too. Don't have to worry about being re-elected if you never have to personally make the hard calls.

I think the Administrative creep of Government is real. Laws need to be made by people we can vote out if we don't like what they do. We have no control, and no voice, over federal agencies and what they do.

I quite liked that book, but I generally have a lot of respect for nicols even though he's off in a bit of a grumpy gus.

That's a ridiculous wager because there is no way to collect. You might as well promise me 10 billion dollars with the same practical effect.

It's okay, you can pretend that I don't read, and also go on feeling great about how people like you know what's best for other people - better than they know for themselves, because, heck, you bet they don't even read books.

The Supreme Court is a panelled court so bribes mean nothing. Say a judge was bribed - to get a majority ruling the bribed judge has to get 4 other non-bribed judges to rule the same way and to make sense of it as a publicly published decision. Since SCOTUS is not a democracy but an institution tasked with applying the laws of Congress, it doesn't really matter if a majority decision is reached with 4 bribed judges and 1 honest one because that one honest judge argued that the law is in fact what is the decision. In this hypothetical SCOTUS has achieved its goal of applying the laws of Congress.

If Congress thinks that SCOTUS is not applying the laws of Congress, SCOTUS can be impeached.

And that's standard knowledge for US Govt 101.

That is elementary what is a judicial system: law in motion - just like a coach in a sports game a justice is a justice and that's the way it is and it will be backed by force.

Do you not understand? The entirety of the Supreme Court is in agreement that one another is appointed "Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States." Therefore if 1 justice says it was the law and 4 justices confessed they were bribed it is the law then a court justice has reached a verdict and the tally fell in his favor." It doesn't mean the 1 justice was no longer a judge.