Time To Let Go of Roe?

[Zero]

Given that abortion seems to be perhaps the most intractable issue in the United States, I’ve found myself pondering what the solution may be from time to time.

This article presents an interesting case arguing that Democrats need to let it head to the states.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar ... oe/303695/

[Martin Hash]

I think they'd trade for removal of the 2nd Amendment?

[Zero]

I think they'd trade for removal of the 2nd Amendment?

I hope not.

[Martin Hash]

So, it would be a one-way deal, cancel Roe but keep guns?

Do you know how precedence works in SCOTUS?

[Zero]

So, it would be a one-way deal, cancel Roe but keep guns?

Do you know how precedence works in SCOTUS?

I thought so, but I’m just approaching the article as a thought exercise atm. What would it do to the national discourse if Roe was removed, and the issue could be decided at the state level?

If we’re talking miraculous horse-trading, I’d give up Roe and then challenge ProLife voices to support Universal healthcare first. /shrug

[Fife]

I know something of precedents in SCOTUS reasoning. Stare decisis, even. What is the precedence mojo? I'm not familiar with that spell.

[Zero]

https://legal-dictionary.thefreediction ... re+decisis

Nevertheless, the principle of stare decisis has always been tempered with a conviction that prior decisions must comport with notions of good reason or they can be overruled by the highest court in the jurisdiction.

The U.S. Supreme Court rarely overturns one of its precedents, but when it does, the ruling usually signifies a new way of looking at an important legal issue. For example, in the landmark case brown v. board of education, 347 U.S. 483, 74 S. Ct. 686, 98 L. Ed. 873 (1954), the Supreme Court repudiated the separate-but-equal doctrine it endorsed in plessy v. ferguson, 163 U.S. 537, 16 S. Ct. 1138, 41 L. Ed. 256 (1896). The Court ignored stare decisis, renouncing a legal precedent that had legitimated racial Segregation for almost sixty years

.

[Martin Hash]

I know something of precedents in SCOTUS reasoning. Stare decisis, even. What is the precedence mojo? I'm not familiar with that spell.

See, it works like this: even with a conservative majority in SCOTUS, Roe has been and will be upheld due to precedence.

p.s. Surprised you missed that.

[Speaker to Animals]

The Dred Scott ruling of out time. Even Ginsberg wants to toss it in a wastebucket and drop the wastebucket into Mount Doom where it belongs.

[Martin Hash]

Okay, which Roe case was granted cert?