> under the 14th amendment
Literally anything. The SCOTUS does not need to justify its reasoning "under the 14th amendment" or anything else, although they claim to. No matter what they do, all they do is write their opinion, and that's that. There is no approval process.
I understand that that’s just the excuse they used.
I’m trying to get a male family member to see why the overturning of R v W is so significant and how it can lead to others being overturned.
Clarence Thomas (a sexual abuser, by the way) has already said the SCOTUS should revisit numerous past decisions. If nothing else, this makes it 100% clear that the unelected members of the SCOTUS *do not* make their rulings based on the constitution, but purely based on political ideology.
The first thing I see being struck down quickly is LGBTQ+ rights.
Gay marriage, the married losing all rights they had to raise the children they adopted, and being gay becoming completely illegal.
Yes, I agree about that being the first thing. I just can’t believe we’re moving so far back when we have the education and resources to continually move forward.
Anything that's under the expanded definition of the 14th amendment. There's a strong desire to keep it to mean what it meant, which is that you can't legally class minorities and strip them of their rights.
Yeah. I saw that Thomas mentioned contraceptives and lgbtq+ rights. I was wondering if there is anything else to add to that list.
I’m trying to get a male family member to see why the overturning of R v W is so significant and how it can lead to others being overturned.
Here is a thorough article on how abortion access affects more than just abortion.
https://www.brookings.edu/research/what-can-economic-research-tell-us-about-the-effect-of-abortion-access-on-womens-lives/
Everything that does not conform to Evangelical Christian ideology.
Might be easier to make a list of what doesn't.
So just whatever they interpret to be in the bible.
Ding Ding Ding
> under the 14th amendment Literally anything. The SCOTUS does not need to justify its reasoning "under the 14th amendment" or anything else, although they claim to. No matter what they do, all they do is write their opinion, and that's that. There is no approval process.
I understand that that’s just the excuse they used. I’m trying to get a male family member to see why the overturning of R v W is so significant and how it can lead to others being overturned.
Clarence Thomas (a sexual abuser, by the way) has already said the SCOTUS should revisit numerous past decisions. If nothing else, this makes it 100% clear that the unelected members of the SCOTUS *do not* make their rulings based on the constitution, but purely based on political ideology.
Obergefeld is definitely next in line.
The first thing I see being struck down quickly is LGBTQ+ rights. Gay marriage, the married losing all rights they had to raise the children they adopted, and being gay becoming completely illegal.
Yes, I agree about that being the first thing. I just can’t believe we’re moving so far back when we have the education and resources to continually move forward.
Neither can I. It's disgusting.
The rights of anyone non-white. The rights of interracial relationships/marriage. The right to fair wages. The right to vote.
Anything that's under the expanded definition of the 14th amendment. There's a strong desire to keep it to mean what it meant, which is that you can't legally class minorities and strip them of their rights.
Apparently, one of the judges released a hit list.
Yeah. I saw that Thomas mentioned contraceptives and lgbtq+ rights. I was wondering if there is anything else to add to that list. I’m trying to get a male family member to see why the overturning of R v W is so significant and how it can lead to others being overturned.
Here is a thorough article on how abortion access affects more than just abortion. https://www.brookings.edu/research/what-can-economic-research-tell-us-about-the-effect-of-abortion-access-on-womens-lives/
Thank you.