3 ms·
Do keep in mind Roe didn't have standing. There's no harm from denying somebody an abortion when they're not pregnant.
by lesuorac 2y ago
Do keep in mind Roe didn't have standing.
There's no harm from denying somebody an abortion when they're not pregnant.
- injb 2y agoSo what though? I don't know exactly the reasoning for standing requirements, but they clearly weren't intended to prevent suits over things that affect millions of people in exactly the same way. I mean, standing would prevent man from suing to overturn a ban on women voting, but that's clearly a bug, not a feature.
- lesuorac 2y agoMy point is that you can find evidence for any outcome. The Supreme Court has a stance they like and backpedal to make the argument for it leading to inconsistent rulings. There are a myraid of ways that roe vs wade could've turned out and in the final ruling document they'd all fit the correct format.
- jellicle 2y agoRoe was pregnant.
- lesuorac 2y ago_was_ not _is_. > [2] McCorvey gave birth to a daughter at Dallas Osteopathic Hospital on June 2, 1970 At that point she lost standing similar to another Jane Doe whose case became moot because she already had the abortion [1] and the desired action (injunction against an abortion) is irrelevant because it's already happened. [1]: https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/supreme-court-issues-decision-jane-doe-abortion-case https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/supreme-court-issues-dec... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade#History_of_abortion_laws_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade#History_of_abortio...