4 ms·

do you think the supreme court did this because they share the same opinion as rbg? I think this Case was maybe a wonky solution for the Problem but it was the

by mvts 4y ago

do you think the supreme court did this because they share the same opinion as rbg? I think this Case was maybe a wonky solution for the Problem but it was the only one you Americans Had.

danpalmer 4y ago
They definitely did not. RBG thought that Roe v Wade won for the wrong reasons, but didn't want to repeal it because of the damage she knew it would cause – she wanted to roll-forward rather than roll-back. This court, or at least the conservative majority, are very much in favour of rolling-back, and I suspect are only vaguely in favour of letting the legislature pass laws because they know that there will be challenges to those laws that they can then get involved in, meanwhile they have shifted the overton window of women's rights.
- rhinoceraptor 4y ago
  It's important to note that the idea that Roe was decided incorrectly, is a myth perpetuated by fedsoc and other reactionaries. And the liberal legal academics did nothing to counter it.
  - thehappypm 4y ago
    It’s not a myth.
    - rhinoceraptor 4y ago
      Only if you buy in to the reactionary attack on substantive due process in general. And it's a mistake to think if Roe were decided any other way, that it still wouldn't have been overturned. Reactionaries do a great job of smuggling their politics as socially acceptable, fictional legal frameworks like textualism, even though they clearly abandon that whenever it is in conflict with their politics.
  - keneda7 4y ago
    I am confused here. Are you saying these are all myths? https://www.newsweek.com/ruth-bader-ginsburg-roe-wade-abortion-scotus-1702948 https://www.newsweek.com/ruth-bader-ginsburg-roe-wade-aborti... https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-offers-critique-roe-v-wade-during-law-school-visit https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/justice-ruth-bader-ginsbur... https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/05/06/ruth-bader-ginsburg-roe-wade/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/05/06/ruth-bader... Seems to me RGB did feel that ruling was weak and should have decided based on equal protections not privacy.
    - rhinoceraptor 4y ago
      Do you really think they wouldn't still overturn if it was decided based on equal protection? We should not fall into the trap of deifying the court. They are not above politics and they never have been. And they didn't rule against it because of the privacy angle. They ruled against it because they are trying to destroy the jurisprudence of substantive due process and unenumerated rights, because it serves their reactionary politics.
  - danpalmer 4y ago
    To clarify, I think it was the right decision, for a weak but correct reason. Ideally it would have been decided for the reasons of bodily autonomy.

by mvts 4y ago

do you think the supreme court did this because they share the same opinion as rbg? I think this Case was maybe a wonky solution for the Problem but it was the only one you Americans Had.

danpalmer 4y ago

They definitely did not. RBG thought that Roe v Wade won for the wrong reasons, but didn't want to repeal it because of the damage she knew it would cause – she wanted to roll-forward rather than roll-back. This court, or at least the conservative majority, are very much in favour of rolling-back, and I suspect are only vaguely in favour of letting the legislature pass laws because they know that there will be challenges to those laws that they can then get involved in, meanwhile they have shifted the overton window of women's rights.

rhinoceraptor 4y ago
It's important to note that the idea that Roe was decided incorrectly, is a myth perpetuated by fedsoc and other reactionaries. And the liberal legal academics did nothing to counter it.
- thehappypm 4y ago
  It’s not a myth.
  - rhinoceraptor 4y ago
    Only if you buy in to the reactionary attack on substantive due process in general. And it's a mistake to think if Roe were decided any other way, that it still wouldn't have been overturned. Reactionaries do a great job of smuggling their politics as socially acceptable, fictional legal frameworks like textualism, even though they clearly abandon that whenever it is in conflict with their politics.
- keneda7 4y ago
  I am confused here. Are you saying these are all myths? https://www.newsweek.com/ruth-bader-ginsburg-roe-wade-abortion-scotus-1702948 https://www.newsweek.com/ruth-bader-ginsburg-roe-wade-aborti... https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-offers-critique-roe-v-wade-during-law-school-visit https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/justice-ruth-bader-ginsbur... https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/05/06/ruth-bader-ginsburg-roe-wade/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/05/06/ruth-bader... Seems to me RGB did feel that ruling was weak and should have decided based on equal protections not privacy.
  - rhinoceraptor 4y ago
    Do you really think they wouldn't still overturn if it was decided based on equal protection? We should not fall into the trap of deifying the court. They are not above politics and they never have been. And they didn't rule against it because of the privacy angle. They ruled against it because they are trying to destroy the jurisprudence of substantive due process and unenumerated rights, because it serves their reactionary politics.
- danpalmer 4y ago
  To clarify, I think it was the right decision, for a weak but correct reason. Ideally it would have been decided for the reasons of bodily autonomy.