BREAKING LIVE: Supreme Court Vote to END Roe v Wade in DRAFT OPINION by Justice Samuel Alito Leaked

[mystery-ak]

If true, Not surprising why the rats hoped Justice Thomas illness would take him off the bench.

That...or impeaching him!

[corbe]

 

[mystery-ak]

Biden reacts to Supreme Court draft opinion appearing to overturn Roe vs. Wade

In the short term, Biden and Democrats intend to seize on the apparent overturning of Roe to galvanize voters ahead of the November midterm elections. They are desperate to motivate a base that’s been disappointed by the president’s inability to get much of his agenda through a narrowly divided Congress, and to appeal to swing voters given that a solid majority of Americans support maintaining abortion rights.

“If the court does overturn Roe, it will fall on our nation’s elected officials at all levels of government to protect a woman’s right to choose. And it will fall on voters to elect pro-choice officials this November,” Biden said in the statement, noting that Democrats don’t currently have the ability to codify abortion rights. “At the federal level, we will need more pro-choice senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe, which I will work to pass and sign into law.”

more
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2022-05-03/biden-reacts-to-supreme-court-draft-opinion-appearing-to-overturn-roe-v-wade

[mystery-ak]

Before Finally Overturning Roe, Supreme Court Must Block Yet Another Insurrection Attempt
By: Mollie Hemingway
May 03, 2022

The Supreme Court is poised to relinquish its nearly 50-year stranglehold on abortion law and return the debate over whether states may protect unborn human life to the American people and their elected representatives, according to a draft opinion that was leaked to Politico reporters. If the draft opinion authored by Associate Justice Samuel Alito stands, it would be a momentous course correction for the court.

Roe v. Wade, the radical decision that took the abortion debate away from the American people, has myriad legal, scientific, and constitutional critics. Even abortion supporters complained about its weaknesses, as Alito mentions in his draft opinion. Roe was issued in 1973, shortly after the end of the Warren Court, known for pushing through radical changes through the power of a majority of justices rather than on the basis of the Constitution.

“[W]ielding nothing but ‘raw judicial power,’ the Court usurped the power to address a question of profound moral and social importance that the Constitution unequivocally leaves for the people,” Alito wrote in the draft opinion.

A previous attempt to salvage the court’s abortion edicts, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, was supposed to keep the court from having to hear so many controversial abortion cases from the states. Instead, the court has been inundated with challenges to its complicated abortion jurisprudence. And states have gotten better at fine-tuning their challenges.

more
https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/03/before-finally-overturning-roe-supreme-court-must-block-yet-another-insurrection-attempt/

[corbe]

       Picture of OUR Republic

[Kamaji]

If the Court really wants to push back, it should declare that, because the illicit leak has irrevocably tainted the case and whatever opinion the Court will ultimately hand down, that they are revoking their grant of certiorari in the case, and will take up the matter if and when it presents itself again in a subsequent case.

That would represent a rather milque toast win for the left, because it would not be the Court's new imprimatur on existing abortion rights law, and would remove the impetus the democrats are hoping to use for the midterm elections.  It would also take a lot of the pressure (not all) out of the demand to pack the Court.  On the other hand, it would generate a huge amount of anger on the part of the right, which should legitimately be directed at democrats/libs/progs and should energize the right to take full control of Congress in the midterm elections.

[txradioguy]

Lets not forget that Roe was based on a book "Abortion" by Larry Lader...not actual law...and that one of Justice Blackmun's clerks actually wrote the decision based on said book.

https://www.godreports.com/2015/11/roe-v-wade-influenced-by-false-historical-citations-and-a-young-clerks-over-zealous-hand/

[dfwgator]

Where is @Jazzhead when you need him?

We don't need him.

[Bigun]

If the Court really wants to push back, it should declare that, because the illicit leak has irrevocably tainted the case and whatever opinion the Court will ultimately hand down, that they are revoking their grant of certiorari in the case, and will take up the matter if and when it presents itself again in a subsequent case.

That would represent a rather milque toast win for the left, because it would not be the Court's new imprimatur on existing abortion rights law, and would remove the impetus the democrats are hoping to use for the midterm elections.  It would also take a lot of the pressure (not all) out of the demand to pack the Court.  On the other hand, it would generate a huge amount of anger on the part of the right, which should legitimately be directed at democrats/libs/progs and should energize the right to take full control of Congress in the midterm elections.

Sorry @Kamaji but IMHO it is just that sort of thinking that has brought us to the point at which we find ourselves currently.  FAR better to just issue the opinion and let the chips fall as they do.

[DefiantMassRINO]

Is the leak a prosecutable Federal crime?

Can the offending US Supreme Court Justice and/or staff be censured, impeached, sanctioned, or prosecuted?  It's interference of a Federal judicial proceeding.

It sets a precedent that makes the US Supreme Court susceptible to mob threats and violence.

It further politicizes the US Supreme Court deliberation process.

If I were a member, why would I trust any other member with a draft of my decision or dissent?

[mystery-ak]

Senate Democrats will force Republicans to vote on abortion rights
https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,468748.new.html#new

[Kamaji]

Sorry @Kamaji but IMHO it is just that sort of thinking that has brought us to the point at which we find ourselves currently.  FAR better to just issue the opinion and let the chips fall as they do.

I disagree.  The fact of the matter is, the leak has tainted the Court's decision, and if the Court goes ahead and rules on the merits, it will forever after carry that taint.

[Kamaji]

Is the leak a prosecutable Federal crime?

Can the offending US Supreme Court Justice and/or staff be censured, impeached, sanctioned, or prosecuted?  It's interference of a Federal judicial proceeding.

It sets a precedent that makes the US Supreme Court susceptible to mob threats and violence.

It further politicizes the US Supreme Court deliberation process.

If I were a member, why would I trust any other member with a draft of my decision or dissent?

If a justice was involved in the leak, or knew about the possibility and did nothing to stop it when he/she could, then yes, I would think that would be a basis for impeachment of that justice.

[mystery-ak]

 Collins: Draft Roe decision ‘completely inconsistent’ with what Gorsuch, Kavanaugh said
by Jordain Carney   05/03/22 10:32 AM ET

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said on Tuesday that a leaked draft ruling by the Supreme Court was “completely inconsistent” with what Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch told her during their private conversations as Supreme Court nominees.

“If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office,” Collins said in a statement.

“Obviously, we won’t know each Justice’s decision and reasoning until the Supreme Court officially announces its opinion in this case,” she added.

Collins’s statement comes after Politico published a draft decision from the Supreme Court, authored by Justice Alito, to strike down Roe v. Wade, a landmark case that guarantees the right to an abortion.

The draft ruling concludes by declaring that Roe and the court’s 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey have no grounding in the Constitution. The court is expected to issue an actual ruling in the case in the next two months.

more
https://thehill.com/news/3475255-collins-draft-roe-decision-completely-inconsistent-with-what-gorsuch-kavanaugh-told-me/

[Kamaji]

Collins: Draft Roe decision ‘completely inconsistent’ with what Gorsuch, Kavanaugh said
by Jordain Carney   05/03/22 10:32 AM ET

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said on Tuesday that a leaked draft ruling by the Supreme Court was “completely inconsistent” with what Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch told her during their private conversations as Supreme Court nominees.

“If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office,” Collins said in a statement.

“Obviously, we won’t know each Justice’s decision and reasoning until the Supreme Court officially announces its opinion in this case,” she added.

Collins’s statement comes after Politico published a draft decision from the Supreme Court, authored by Justice Alito, to strike down Roe v. Wade, a landmark case that guarantees the right to an abortion.

The draft ruling concludes by declaring that Roe and the court’s 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey have no grounding in the Constitution. The court is expected to issue an actual ruling in the case in the next two months.

more
https://thehill.com/news/3475255-collins-draft-roe-decision-completely-inconsistent-with-what-gorsuch-kavanaugh-told-me/

Neither Gorsuch nor Kavanaugh authored this draft, did they, sweetie.

[txradioguy]

If a justice was involved in the leak, or knew about the possibility and did nothing to stop it when he/she could, then yes, I would think that would be a basis for impeachment of that justice.

If the Wise Latina leaked the ruling she can be impeached.  If it turns out to her be her clerk that leaked then the FBI gets involved and he's facing federal jail time.

[DefiantMassRINO]

Could this be a political false flag disinformation campaign conducted by Dems desperate to salvage chances in the midterms, or by a foreign power (Russia?) to have Americans fight amongst themselves and take attention away from Ukraine?

Has the Ministry of Truth said anything about the truthiness of these reports?

[Hoodat]

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said on Tuesday that a leaked draft ruling by the Supreme Court was “completely inconsistent” with what Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch told her during their private conversations as Supreme Court nominees.

So upholding the Constitution, to which both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh swore an oath to do, somehow is secondary to what Susan Collins wanted.

[txradioguy]

Could this be a political false flag disinformation campaign conducted by Dems desperate to salvage chances in the midterms, or by a foreign power (Russia?) to have Americans fight amongst themselves and take attention away from Ukraine?

That's my personal belief until we hear a definitive announcement from the SCOTUS on this ruling.

Has the Ministry of Truth said anything about the truthiness of these reports?

She's too busy obsessing with Harry Potter.

[Bigun]

I disagree.  The fact of the matter is, the leak has tainted the Court's decision, and if the Court goes ahead and rules on the merits, it will forever after carry that taint.

If the court allows the illegal leaking of a memo to "taint" a decision already made we will never have another decision unpopular with the left.

[Hoodat]

Neither Gorsuch nor Kavanaugh authored this draft, did they, sweetie.

If the State of Maine wants to keep abortion legal in Maine, then have at it.  All this ruling does is to prohibit them from forcing Georgia to keep abortion legal in Georgia.

[Hoodat]

I swear to G-d, democrats would elect Satan if he were a democrat, and he likely is.

You got that right.

[Kamaji]

If the court allows the illegal leaking of a memo to "taint" a decision already made we will never have another decision unpopular with the left.

That's an argument that can be left to another day.  It certainly means that the Court must (a) vet its clerks and staff better, and (b) put more limitations on who can access a justice's drafts.

[DefiantMassRINO]

... only if Satan is pro-choice and has a plan to fight Global Climate Change.

[Bigun]

That's an argument that can be left to another day.  It certainly means that the Court must (a) vet its clerks and staff better, and (b) put more limitations on who can access a justice's drafts.

NO! It isn't.  Not after they so recently punted in Texas vs Pennsylvania.