4 ms·

Yeah, I have a problem with that. This is a hyperbolic example to make a point -> What happens if a state passes a law that has a mandatory death penalty for p

Yeah, I have a problem with that. This is a hyperbolic example to make a point -> What happens if a state passes a law that has a mandatory death penalty for people who are left-handed, and our new Supreme Court justices say it is A-OK with a state to have this kind of law? I'm not saying this specific law, again it is a silly example to make a point, but why would a state be compelled to give full faith and credit to laws of other states that are completely batshite crazy? One that is NOT crazy is many red states want to convict women having an abortion of murder. This is an actual thing that many Republicans take seriously and want. This can mean life imprisonment, or even execution of the woman for murder. How is this ok?

Dracophoenix 4y ago
Yeah, I have a problem with that. > This is a hyperbolic example to make a point -> What happens if a state passes a law that has a mandatory death penalty for people who are left-handed, and our new Supreme Court justices say it is A-OK with a state to have this kind of law? Time to learn ambidexterity. In all seriousness, what you've described is basically a Dred Scott scenario, except left-handedness is discriminated against. Luckily, The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment addresses this. > I'm not saying this specific law, again it is a silly example to make a point, but why would a state be compelled to give full faith and credit to laws of other states that are completely batshite crazy? A law isn't considered "batshite crazy" if there's a "compelling interest". And now that the issue has been left to the states, what constitutes a compelling interest is mostly left to them as well. > One that is NOT crazy is many red states want to convict women having an abortion of murder. This is an actual thing that many Republicans take seriously and want. This can mean life imprisonment, or even execution of the woman for murder. How is this ok? I don't support the argument for the convictions myself, however even in blue states, killing a pregnant woman can result in a charge for double homicide. The first step would be coming to consistent defining what life is, but many lawmakers and judges avoid that. As for life imprisonment and executions, if abortion is considered murder, then those punishments are considered proportionate to the alleged crime. Proportionality is what makes it "ok".

Dracophoenix 4y ago

Yeah, I have a problem with that. > This is a hyperbolic example to make a point -> What happens if a state passes a law that has a mandatory death penalty for people who are left-handed, and our new Supreme Court justices say it is A-OK with a state to have this kind of law? Time to learn ambidexterity. In all seriousness, what you've described is basically a Dred Scott scenario, except left-handedness is discriminated against. Luckily, The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment addresses this. > I'm not saying this specific law, again it is a silly example to make a point, but why would a state be compelled to give full faith and credit to laws of other states that are completely batshite crazy? A law isn't considered "batshite crazy" if there's a "compelling interest". And now that the issue has been left to the states, what constitutes a compelling interest is mostly left to them as well. > One that is NOT crazy is many red states want to convict women having an abortion of murder. This is an actual thing that many Republicans take seriously and want. This can mean life imprisonment, or even execution of the woman for murder. How is this ok? I don't support the argument for the convictions myself, however even in blue states, killing a pregnant woman can result in a charge for double homicide. The first step would be coming to consistent defining what life is, but many lawmakers and judges avoid that. As for life imprisonment and executions, if abortion is considered murder, then those punishments are considered proportionate to the alleged crime. Proportionality is what makes it "ok".