Select Page

Supreme Court:  Roe v. Wade is Struck Down

Supreme Court:  Roe v. Wade is Struck Down

The official word has come from the Supreme Court. Roe v. Wade has been overruled. The vote was 6-3, with the conservative majority prevailing.

Roe vs. Wade was a 50 year old landmark ruling that declared a constitutional right to abortion. This ruling itself does NOT outlaw abortions. It sends the issue back to the individual states to decide.

“Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey [a 1992 Supreme Court case] are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.”

The ruling upholds a Mississippi law outlawing abortions after 15 weeks, and will trigger “bans” on abortions in 13 states (automatically or with minimal effort).  It is expected that other states will go equally in the opposite direction.

The potential for this ruling leaked from the Supreme Court last month, in the form of a draft supported by a majority of Justices, but not in final form. Protests have already begun, but have been sporadic up to this point. At the time of this writing, a protest was forming up around the Supreme Court.

You can read the ruling from the Supreme Court here.

As we published yesterday, riots in DC, and likely across the country are already planned.  And no, I don’t mean protests. Expect severe property damage, expect injuries, expect more. This will not be peaceful, the left has trained itself to be violent, anything goes.

About The Author

16 Comments

  1. Poorgrandchildren

    And we will see yet another example of our current version of equal justice under the law. The leftists will get slaps on the wrist at most while right wingers go to prison for minor offenses or nothing at all.

    • frank stetson

      Right wingers are not getting a tough ride, most feel they are being treated with kid gloves. BLM was often arrested on the spot, the 1/6-ers got white privilege, allowed to slink home and then we picked them up later. That saved a whole fuck of a lot of weapons charges right there.

      But we have 850 criminals, most with minor trespass-like offenses and really light sentences. But of the 850, close to 250 have, and deserve, some serious charges and hopefully sentences. Especially the ones with weapons charges.

      Can you say Seditious Conspiracy? (a number have said, yes, we are guilty of that). minor offense? I think it’s about a dozen people so far.

      225 have charges for assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers and employees.
      75 of these include weapons charges.

      Over 140 police and employees were injured during the insurrection.

      I have no issue with following the rule of law, left or right. But to feel these crackers got a bum’s rush is bullshit. They got less than they deserved IMO.

      Before over and done for, we will have over a hundred weapons charges, and a few hundred assault changes as 350 have not yet even been identified beyond their internet photos.

      • PErry

        Boo boo. Suck it up buttercup

        • BeN

          Wow, that’s gay. But OK.

          You’re our huckleberry, Cherry Perry.

      • Joe Gilbertson

        Conservatives not getting a tough ride? What planet are you living on? BLM arrested? Stop the BS Frank.

        • Ben

          Joe, You know lots of BLM got arrested during the simmer of Floyd. Convictions too.

          And I’m sorry, you said 1/6 was like a rock concert, why so concerned about that?

          But thanks for the midterms scotus, I knew these guys would find ways to shot themselves in the foot.

  2. Ben

    ” And no, I don’t mean protests. Expect severe property damage, expect injuries, expect more. This will not be peaceful, the left has trained itself to be violent, anything goes.” Cute Joe. The left has trained itself to be violent? What training? The entire left? Go hyperbolic much? Hoping to divert from the 1/6 Capitol Insurrection violence?

    When it comes to extremist violence, the vast majority comes from the right. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/17/briefing/right-wing-mass-shootings.html

    https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/sep/08/post-911-domestic-terror

    Fact is, who cares about abortion, as compared to the SCOTUS striking down a 50-year Constitutional precedent, basically saying, “nah, they goofed.” That’s one hell of a goof. As compared to abortion, losing a 50-year old constitutional benefit, one that only favors the a minority to boot, then what is next for SCOTUS.

    The highly politized SCJustice Thomas said it all when he issued: “In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.” Sure, why not. And someday, it will be our turn to use the SCOTUS to achieve our political desires and overturn many a Constitutional right on a whim. That’s some shit, Clarence.

    Back in the day when they were job hunting SCOTUS nominees said some shit, apparently many who voted to strike down Roe lies during their Senate hearings to become SCOTUS. Anyone surprised that Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Gorsuch are lying perjurious pigs? They are conservatives in the party of The Big Lie.

    Bret the rapist Kavanaugh, when he could hold back the tears, said: “Roe v. Wade “is important precedent of the Supreme Court that has been reaffirmed many times. But then Planned — and this is the point that I want to make that I think is important. Planned Parenthood v. Casey reaffirmed Roe and did so by considering the stare decisis factors,” he said in 2018. “So Casey now becomes a precedent on precedent. It is not as if it is just a run-of-the-mill case that was decided and never been reconsidered, but Casey specifically reconsidered it, applied the stare decisis factors, and decided to reaffirm it. That makes Casey a precedent on precedent.”

    Piss on precedent. Fuck what I said. Well if he lied about this, then he could have easily lied about his rape.

    Gorsucks said: “Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed. The reliance interest considerations are important there, and all of the other factors that go into analyzing precedent have to be considered,” he told senators in March 2017. “It is a precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court. It was reaffirmed in Casey in 1992 and in several other cases. So a good judge will consider it as precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court worthy as treatment of precedent like any other.”

    Well, screw that truth, girl gotta be able to change her mind.

    He added: “For a judge to start tipping his or her hand about whether they like or dislike this or that precedent would send the wrong signal. It would send the signal to the American people that the judge’s personal views have something to do with the judge’s job.”

    Well, he got that right, we got the signal, you be a pack of liars with the integrity of Putin.

    Alito was smarter, shiftier, when he weaseled: “Roe v. Wade is an important precedent of the Supreme Court. It was decided in 1973, so it has been on the books for a long time,” he said. And then the cya: “If settled means it can’t be re-examined, then that’s one thing,” he told senators on the Judiciary Committee. “If settled means that it is a precedent that is entitled to respect as stare decisis, and all of the factors that I’ve mentioned come into play, including the reaffirmation and all of that, then it is a precedent that is protected, entitled to respect under the doctrine of stare decisis in that way.”

    “It has been challenged. It has been reaffirmed. But it is an issue that is involved in litigation now at all levels.”

    Can you say “I feel like dancin……a tap dance I believe except to suggest a recuse: “I do not think that at this time that I could maintain my impartiality as a member of the judiciary and comment on that specific case.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/24/us/scotus-justices-roe-wade-abortion.html

    Like I said, the overturn of Roe is a tragedy for many. The overturn of a 50-year precedent on Constitutional rights will be a nightmare for the rest of the Republic’s history, which may be shorter now thanks to these bozo’s. Already, Thomas has a number of precedents cued up to leverage this precedent. Someday, it will be our turn. Be careful what you ask for. You may get it.

    • Joe Gilbertson

      I stand by what I said, I’m sorry you don’t understand. But your lack of understanding is willful, so I won’t try to explain.

      • Ben

        That’s because you can’t explain. It’s ok.

  3. Mark

    Ben you should just get over it. The roe v wade ruling was wrong. Now it’s a state issue and should be

  4. Ben

    “The roe v wade ruling was wrong.” Hmmm. Yeah, for 50 years it was right. For multiple re-affirmations by various SCOTUS, it was right. And now this court, many of whom reversed their own nomination testimonies, says Roe is wrong.

    Well, that’s the law, it’s not a Constitutional right, and we now have a precedent for overturning 50-year precedents, on what seems to most observers to be a personal, political, choice. And the idiot Thomas wants to leverage that precedent against many other SCOTUS decisions, he has a list for review —- sounds like a fucking agenda by a proactive conservative politicize court that basically said “we’re smarter that all those justices that came before us and passed or reaffirmed Roe.” These fine five judges ruled they were smarter than the 50 years of judges before them.

    Well, at least we have a path to overturn Heller now. Thank you Alito and company for showing us the precedent.

    • Perry

      It’s still legal. Just not a constitutional right. Never was. The states will decide so don’t get your bowels in an uproar and your kidneys in a downpour.

  5. Ben

    L E T M E G O S L O W, for Perry.

    It’s not about abortion, it’s about precedent. I will let you look that up to discover what precedent means.

    • Luke

      Dredd Scott was precedent. Ain’t you glad that it got overturned?

      • frank stetson

        Luke: yes. And you named the precedent that will happen here too, thanks.

        Dred Scott wasn’t really overturned by the Scotus who set precedent in 1857 when Dred Scott was denied by a supremely racist politicized court. And yes they were Democrats on that court. Four years later, the civil war began, Dred Scott being a contributory factor. Dred Scot was basically affirmed, I guess one could say overturned, by Congress in 1865 by the 13th and 14th amendments. That’s what will happen with this pos Scotus decision also so thanks for pointing that out and pointing out that Republicans set the precedent for how this one will be resolved nationally as well. A woman’s right to choose is not the sovereign province of 50 different states depending of the political whims of each State. There is no logic to 50 potential different answers to this. It’s a woman’s right to choose: universally, not State by State. How can pro-lifers logically conclude that it makes any sort of reasonable sense to have 50 different answers here as if each State’s women need different answers here. Is control over one’s body different in New Jersey from Texas?

        Up until this recent overturn of previously decided Constitutional law, a law that has had multiple reaffirms by various Supreme Courts, the Dred Scot decision is considered the worst SCOTUS decision ever. Not anymore. And like Dred Scot, this will be ultimately overturned by Congress, something that should have happened decades ago.

        In 2021, only 24 countries/territories out of over 250 ban abortion including: Andorra, Aruba, Republic of the Congo, Curaçao, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Iraq, Jamaica, Laos, Madagascar, Malta, Mauritania, Nicaragua, Palau, Philippines, San Marino, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Suriname, Tonga, and West Bank & Gaza Strip Palestinian territories. Nine American States are in that elite squad with more to be added after trigger laws take effect.
        As we evolve as a nation by taking a back seat of the world’s developed nations, our conservative court continues to take us back in time, harming all sorts of people along the way. See you at the midterms, thanks for new galvanizing issues putting the economy, gas prices and the war in the back seat too.

  6. Mike

    Joe, I am sure you are disappointed that your prognostication was wrong regarding riots-lots of protests, but no riots. On the abortion front, the only violence over the years that I am aware of has been from those on the right. And yes-there has been lots of violence from you right wingers, up to and including murder. Shame on you for trying to portray the left as the “violent” ones who always get away with it….

  1. The story of Tyre Nickol’s and his tragic death at the hands of Memphis police officer is impossible for understanding.…