That’s correct. thanks!
Sorry, thought you were asking if the TX SG was also the AG.
Best case scenario is they say the law is unconstitutional but provide a roadmap for Texas/elsewhere to make a constitutional law that does the same thing.
They’re political operatives. They know this will be unpopular so they will vote it down.
Just like they will keep roe intact but continue to completely limit it so it’s nearly useless and the liberals will fawn over their restraint
1 Like
same as it always has been.
Yeah, my expectation is this gets completely shot down. Possibly with a concurrent opinion that signals where further encroachment on Roe V Wade will be allowed.
This law still served its purpose, it will dampen access to abortion in Texas even if overturned.
Whoever was making the final argument in rebuttal for the United States seems like a badass.
I’m definitely no law bro and only have a layman’s perspective on this stuff, but wow, I can’t believe Texas really went with the “Hey, we aren’t saying that abortion is illegal, but if you do one, we’ll let regular citizens sue you for 10k a pop.”
Why wouldn’t some other state with a Democrat majority pass a law that says, “Hey, we’re not saying that owning a AR-15 is illegal, but if you do own one, we’ll let your neighbor collect cash money from you.”
1 Like
Seems like all the arguments conceded that abortion was constitutionally protected, but like, the court can’t stop ordinary folks from suing whoever they wanna sue!
Oh man, I must be a constitutional scholar. And, I LIKE BEER TOO.
16 Likes
I’m already nauseous thinking about the NYT headline about Amy Comey Barrett saving Roe and articles saying the court isn’t that conservative blah blah blah
5 Likes
I dunno, I feel like these questions could just be a setup for the announcement that the court is going full Calvinball. It’s not like any of these arguments are newly emerging since they let this law go into effect in the first place. So they raise all the obvious objections, and then nuke Roe from orbit anyway, and any complementary gun laws get injunctions and overturns.
I think they will wait for a direct challenge (I think there is a pending Mississippi law that qualifies) and nuke it cleanly.
Overturning Roe was literally the whole reason these people got into law in the first place. Gorsuch, Alito, Barrett and Kavanaugh have spent their entire careers in pursuit of this exact thing.
2 Likes
If they nuke roe which I highly doubt it’ll be the Mississippi case. Way cleaner.
But they won’t. These judges are fully political. They know the backlash would be huge and the right is so close to locking up power indefinitely. Nuking roe before 2022 would risk that.
1 Like
kavnaught is just appalled that’s the best theory they could come up with, as there appear to be no further carveouts for conservative action. it’s hard to accept fedsoc let this stunt get this far. they obviously liked the effect it had on clinics, but it takes years to normalie the oppression before it can get rubber stamped by scotus without spending political capital
this is my guess, sort of. SCOTUS justices are probably pissed that a bunch of hayseed state legislators tried some fancy trick play to do an end run around judicial power, and they can’t let idea get even a bit of oxygen, whereas they all know they’ll have a million other opportunities this year alone to gut Roe v Wade.
1 Like
Don’t know if this is a hot take or not: The Supreme Court explicitly nuking Roe v Wade will have no impact on future elections.
Why would it? Voters delivered a trifecta and will have nothing to show for it. Mitch pissed in their faces and the Dems are writing letters. Fucking hopeless