Mitch made the Court partisan, first with his denying even a hearing the sitting President's nominee, second making it a majority vote, and last steamrolling the last appointee thru in record time to beat an election.
And to make matters worse, he set numerous precedents that is going to keep the Court partisan for quite some time now
"The atmosphere is among the factors that determines the Earth's atmosphere." --ZenMode
"Donald has failed in almost every endeavor he has attempted. " --floridafan
"Abortion is not a moral issue. " --BidenPresident
"Propaganda can also be factual." --Flash
"Even after being vaccinated, you shed virus particles." --Jerome
"no slavery is forcing another into labor" -archives
"Evs are much safer from fires" -- Nordberg
"Abortion has killed no one." -- LurchAddams
"The atmosphere is among the factors that determines the Earth's atmosphere." --ZenMode
"Donald has failed in almost every endeavor he has attempted. " --floridafan
"Abortion is not a moral issue. " --BidenPresident
"Propaganda can also be factual." --Flash
"Even after being vaccinated, you shed virus particles." --Jerome
"no slavery is forcing another into labor" -archives
"Evs are much safer from fires" -- Nordberg
"Abortion has killed no one." -- LurchAddams
"The atmosphere is among the factors that determines the Earth's atmosphere." --ZenMode
"Donald has failed in almost every endeavor he has attempted. " --floridafan
"Abortion is not a moral issue. " --BidenPresident
"Propaganda can also be factual." --Flash
"Even after being vaccinated, you shed virus particles." --Jerome
"no slavery is forcing another into labor" -archives
"Evs are much safer from fires" -- Nordberg
"Abortion has killed no one." -- LurchAddams
Yeah, we know, you say that all the time, the Court isn't changing the Constitution, only interpreting it, and don't respond with they don't have the authority to do that, seen that one also, the reality is that the Constitution in essence is nothing more than a five page document on paper, men have had to apply it, didn't you ever notice such as the military draft or interstate highways aren't anywhere in the Constitution yet they exist today
Maybe, but I listened to the oral arguments and don't know why we think they are about to make that decision.
States can already regulate abortion after the 1st trimester and prohibit it after the 2nd.
I don't know why Clarence Thomas would change his mind by the oral arguments. If he is doing his job he has already read the briefs that contain the oral argument(s). Asking too many questions just takes the lawyers away from their main point(s).
States led the way for much progressive legislation. Some of it was used by the courts in expanding those policies to the entire nation.
Gay marriage, integration, the right to an attorney, abortion, gun regulations, term limits, healthcare, etc. all started at the state level and spread to more states or eventually to the national level.
Those movements may have begun at the state level, but that’s not what I was referring to as “States Rights”. States Rights were national guard and the governor at the University of Alabama. University of Mississippi. Poll taxes. Different drinking fountains.
And, as your post indicates, states don’t have rights. People do
The difference between our examples is that yours represents the people seeking expansion of their rights, while my reference was the state governments, under the guise of “States Rights”, flexing their muscle to suppress rights. That’s why the term is still considered dog whistle for discrimination.
Bookmarks