T O P
DarksunDaFirst

Great way to start your day: with a gateway being opened to more authoritarian nonsense.


Lord_Dreadlow

Abortion tourism is about to get very popular.


tallwhiteninja

Abortion clinic startups in border cities about to take off.


rumbletummy

Native American reservations as well.


thatsmyburrito

Up on the right wing agenda chopping block is tribal sovereignty. “This Land”podcast is tracking the court cases that will be used to do this.


tallwhiteninja

Narrower majority there: Gorsuch has typically been pro-tribal rights. If Roberts decides to pull the "avoid making hard decisions" card he's pulled before, it may not get through.


DrothReloaded

I feel like counting on SCOTUS to uphold our rights is misplaced.


cuentaderana

A lot of reservations get healthcare through the Indian Health Services. Which are federally funded and therefore do not provide abortion except in the case where it endangers the mother’s life.


AgentMykel

Fireworks and abortions in one trip.


bxsco

I think it’ll be either/or. Fireworks on the border in your state = abortion illegal.


Dornith

Aren't some states already drafting legislation to make it illegal to get an abortion in another state? Granted, that's blatantly unconstitutional, but I'm not sure or current SCOTUS will care.


rediKELous

Yep, and others have passed laws of no extradition for those “crimes”. Last time something like this happened, we had a civil war.


BearcattyDaddy

Will states be able to report personal medical records(ie abortions) to other states? Let's say a girl in abortion illegal state gets pregnant and finds out in first trimester from at home tests. Tells absolutely no one. Travels to abortion legal state and has legal procedure done. Returns to home state. I don't understand how the home state would possibly find out unless medical records are shared which also seems highly unconstitutional?


theumph

They wouldn't. That's why they have their "bounty laws", which would pay someone to snitch on them.


OG_ClusterFox

Like the current Texas bounty law-where private citizens can report individuals who get abortions and also the medical professionals who participate. They are rewarded with 10K as well


leshake

We will have women having miscarriages getting sued by Karens for getting an abortion.


sven1olaf

I believe this already happened this week.


TheBestLittlePotato

>Will states be able to report personal medical records(ie abortions) to other states? Apps that track menstruation cycles can sell the data they collect and this data can be used to track whenever someone has an abortion.


Funny-Information159

Or miscarriage. Or a stressful month when woman in question was ill or not eating much…


rediKELous

Well with this ruling, they effectively nullified the right to privacy which would include medical privacy in theory. We’ll see how it shakes out.


BearcattyDaddy

Well isn't this turning into a terrifying dystopia.


craftycontrarian

But states' rights!! Unless your state does something we don't like. Then we come crawling to the federal government to get the fugitive slave act passed.


JustafanIV

Granted, it is a concurrent opinion, but Kavanaugh more or less explicitly stated that laws banning citizens of a state from traveling to another state for an abortion would be unconstitutional.


rediKELous

Kavanaugh also said Roe was settled law. Fuck whatever he has to say, his words mean nothing.


Zorops

That would be just like putting you in jail for smoking weed in amsterdam when you come back to your theocracy of a country.


MotoGeno

Some states, like Texas I believe, are looking to ban even traveling out of state to seek an abortion elsewhere.


Emotionless_AI

This is unconstitutional af.


PopeJDP

Like they care.


[deleted]

[удалено]


banned_wagon_az

That’s just not legal. Not enforceable.


SylveonGold

Then we should legalize making abortions in these states completely private information, and unsharable with these Amy outside government. Therefore protecting pregnant people.


JaeCryme

Which is specifically forbidden by the Constitution. But it’s not like SCOTUS cares anymore what it says, so 🤷‍♂️


[deleted]

[удалено]


YouCanCallMeVanZant

That’s the practical effect of this. Anybody that wants to and has means will just go to a different state. As in most things in life and government it’s the poor that get fucked the most.


AdventurousShower223

Can’t wait for foster care costs to eclipse our defense spending lol.


Trauma_Hawks

Ha, like Congress would ever allocate money to the foster system.


Espiritu13

No no no, that won't happen. There are thousands of "Christian" families waiting in the wing to adopt kids of all ages in the foster system. It's not just babies they're looking for and conservative Christians are DEFINITELY not having as many babies as they can instead of adopting. Wait....fuck. I'm completely wrong.


masterchris

Well don’t worry the ones that do adopt won’t be the type to want to push their religion and sin based guilt onto a new generation! Their will thankfully be far less inter generational trauma now that we’ve eliminated ways in over a dozen states to prevent an unwanted pregnancy from impacting a persons body permanently against their will! Now that women will literally have had no choice but to suffer incontinence or damage to their organs under risk of prison they will be far less likely to resent their children!


Espiritu13

>Now that women will literally have had no choice but to suffer incontinence or damage to their organs under risk of prison they will be far less likely to resent their children! Especially if they're young or under age! But don't worry, some magic Christian is waiting in the wings to prevent that situation. Right? Right?!?!?!? (all sarcasm for those that didn't catch it)


SweetSewerRat

Oh we'll have gangs of abandoned children roaming the streets before they increase the foster care budget lmao. We absolutely cannot stop turning Palestinian children into skeletons, for any reason. It'd disrupt the cash flow of the shareholders.


nullsignature

Lmao @ thinking red states give a flying fuck about orphans or foster care.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Poop_Snoot420

I am most concerned about the impoverished individuals that have no means or capability to raise a human being. Many simply have no option to travel out of state for healthcare.


postdiluvium

There are a lot of instances where a family already has a child and is barely saving money with each paycheck. Having another child would put them in a path towards poverty. Pro life libertarians like to say it's a bunch of college chicks who didn't use protection, but there are actual families trying to scale up the economic ladder that will be kicked down to the ground.


Poop_Snoot420

Of course. And they should have the right to dictate how they want to live their lives. In my mind, the most pure Libertarian stance is that people should have autonomy over their own bodies/lives, free from government interference. This is a crazy time to be alive, and people should have the right to decide if they bring a child into the world.


BabyYodasDirtyDiaper

Cue the rightoids, "Well don't have a baby if you can't afford one!" Also rightoids: "No, you can't get an abortion, even if you were raped."


CosmicMiru

They already thought of that when they made the abortion bounty law in Texas which made the law apply to you even if you left state


yuriydee

This doesnt make sense. Okay federal government shouldnt be involved, but then why should state government be involved in people's private lives? They know damn well the consequence of this is red states will ban abortion and make it illegal.


kingofcould

The best I’ve heard so far is something like: “Leaving it up to states is better than leaving it up to the feds. Maybe we should even leave it up to the individual cities, or — and this would be crazy — the individual”


Rion23

Don't worry, they are just fighting for states rights again. If you can't own the whole human you can at least get a uterus.


TransBrandi

They "fight for States rights" when they don't like Federal law, and fight for Federal law when they don't like State law. It's just a matter of "what is more convenient for the outcome I want" plain and simple. No Republican / fundamentalist Christian that right now is talking about "States' Rights" with respect to abortion is going to support tearing down Federal drug laws to let each state decide for themselves. It's all a bunch of self-serving nonsense.


Startled_Pancakes

Wasn't there a bill in ... missouri I think... to punish those who travel out of state for an Abortion? That seems like it would violate the full faith and credit clause. It also, as you say sort of proves it's not really about states rights.


aceluby

They want fucking pregnancy tests for women to be negative before leaving the state. Oh, want to go on vacation while pregnant? Fuck you and get back in the kitchen. Small government my ass


PhD_in_English

Do you have a source for this? Infuriating


Startled_Pancakes

Here's the [Missouri Bill](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/missouri-considers-law-to-make-illegal-to-aid-or-abet-out-of-state) I was referencing.


Colorado_odaroloC

As long as State's rights are oppressing you (and not the Feds), it is evidently ok by some here.


ManateeCrisps

Reddit "libertarians" seem very comfortable with the desecration of individual liberties in the name of preserving state liberties aka the whims of your local governor.


MacRender

Yeah because they’re just Republicans lol


[deleted]

'We all should have the freedom to live the way I want to live!'


MacRender

lol straight ticket republicans libertarians. “In not a Republican, I just put them into office and actively support everything that do!”


Weekly_Ad6261

Don’t you feel lost in a madhouse with modern libertarians?


yuriydee

Yes, sometimes. I feel like I disagree on certain issues with every single party. Dealing with purists is the worst though. Why should I follow the party platform? The party should evolve its platform alongside its followers instead!


Prestigious-Ad6974

Why didn't rhey just instead argue roe v wade and the 14th amendment didn't cover unrestricted abortions hell they've used that same argument before on the 2nd amendment and many others


STEM4all

Because they want to abolish other rulings on contraception, homosexuality, and same-sex marriage. They literally said in their opinion that they are going after those next.


zveroshka

Also basically said "fuck your privacy" too. How any American isn't freaking out over this is just wild.


Get_your_grape_juice

For all you ‘State’s Rights’ folks: Why ‘State’s Right’s’ specifically? All this railing against the Federal Government, typically because of their perceived tendency to infringe upon *individual* rights. But by kicking *Roe v Wade* out the window, we’re simply allowing the *states* the ‘right’ to infringe upon your *individual* rights. If it’s unacceptable for the *federal* government to infringe upon your *individual* rights, why is it acceptable for the *state* government to infringe upon your *individual* rights? Isn’t the distinction between the level of government at which liberty infringement becomes acceptable kinda arbitrary? Is individual freedom the goal of Libertarianism or isn’t it?


HeartofLion3

States rights has always been used as a sledgehammer against marginalized people in the U.S. When slavery was questioned as one of the most abhorrent and UnAmerican practices imaginable-states rights. When the G.I bill was going to be used to provide for black soldiers who had fought and bled for this country, states rights were used as an excuse to exclude them. And just today, after decades of precedent recognizing women’s bodily autonomy and the individual right to abortion, states rights are now, once again, being used to oppress. This is not new, just another sad move to put down a population that conservatives feel aren’t worthy of individual rights.


pushdose

The State or a state - is still THE STATE infringing on natural rights.


ArbitraryOrder

That Thomas Concurrence is fucking hell


icyhot1993

No different than any other Thomas concurrence


Altruistic-General61

He conveniently left out Loving v Virginia ya know for personal reasons :)


alwaysintheway

I guarantee you his cohorts have it on their lists, though.


CompulsionOSU

This decsion is insane, but his comments are foaming at the mouth insane. We're fucked.


Elranzer

Did Republicans play their hand too early? Now a bunch of single-issue Republicans voters have no motivation to bother voting anymore.


SmartnSad

McConnell said Republicans will push for a federal ban once Roe falls. They still have their voter base, I assure you.


Mylifesuxxx

And if that happens, you'll see everyone touting "states rights" moving the goalposts.


IronChariots

And not a single Republican will care about the contradiction


CivBEWasPrettyBad

Hypocrisy is a foundational principle of the GOP


Hot_Savory_Pancakes

It really is. Almost a point of pride for many.


RanDomino5

The cruelty is the point.


MY_CABBAGES__

No, if anything it galvanizes their base more. They were hungry and got what they wanted. Now it's "we can't let those democrats return to slaughtering babies. Look how much progress we've made."


bjt23

On the other hand, this is going to be pretty unpopular with a lot of people who otherwise would've stayed home on election night. I wouldn't be shocked if this turns what should've been a red wave into a blue one.


Hodgkisl

Especially after the gun rights ruling removing that threat.


bjt23

I think the American people are actually pretty pro gun, and being anti gun is a losing battle for Dems. However, I think abortion matters a great deal more to the average American. Really highlights the issue with a two party system, you're forced to take unrelated policy packages with each other.


Hodgkisl

That’s my point, without that ruling conservatives would still have guns to defend as so many democrat politicians are opposed to them, which would drive turnout. Now dens have a priority issue on a subject the majority of Americans support while republicans do not. I see this pushing a blue wave overriding all the economic concerns that typically switch party control.


jebailey

There's a difference between being pro-gun and being against regulations. I counter that although most Americans are pro-gun they want far more regulation and oversight than what is currently being provided.


eNroNNie

I have said this a lot. I don't understand why -- especially in states like Texas with Beto -- Democratic candidates seem to be doubling down on gun control. I think there are some common sense changes to gun laws that make things less violent on the fringes, but if I was running in Texas I would run as a champion of gun rights, then get elected and not really do anything about it one way or another and fucus on progressive stuff I could get done.


zandikar

l know a lot of pro gun lefties, most just don't make it their identity.


SnazberryDriver2021

Never underestimate the GOP's ability to f\*ck up a sure thing!


zveroshka

I think that's more applicable for Democrats. And in fact Democrats have so many obvious issues they could lean on to gain support and galvanize their base. But they either won't or can't.


BallsMahoganey

Pretty dumb considering the state of the economy was enough for the Dems to get slaughtered in the midterms.


YouCanCallMeVanZant

The only way they’d make progress on the federal level would be to abandon the filibuster because no way 60 senators are voting to outlaw abortion federally. If that happens then it’s gloves off on everything and shit’ll get real wild.


Sarcasm69

70% of people are in favor of some form of abortion


ShockTheChup

"We've stopped legal abortions! Just as many happen now, but now it's *illegal* to do it! See all of our progress?!"


Nocreativeability

They wont be happy until we’re a theocracy. Probably going for gay rights next


rosedogz

Or birth control. Some states, like Louisiana, already have laws in the pipeline that would ban IUDs, the morning after pill, or any forms of birth control that prevent or could potentially prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg. Say goodbye to IVF for couples struggling with infertility, too.


GeneralKenobyy

Jesus, the USA really is a third world country in a tuxedo isn't it


scrappytheboss

Clarence "steaming sack of shit" Thomas explicitly goes after obergefel in his concurrence


ryantttt8

Clarence "wife who tried to overthrow democracy" and Clarence " singular vote against investigating Jan 6th". I wonder why he would vote that way


OneEyedKenobi

Or going after all the rainbow flags flown on govt buildings in June for gay pride month


djpurity666

The doctor's office should be the woman and her doctor. Not the woman, her doctor, and the government. That's too crowded. Get the government out


psychicesp

Many of the states with abortion bans leave allowances for medically necessary abortion, but even that is crippled. If removing a non-cancerous mole meant a Class B Felony charge, a lot of doctors would cease following the cautionary principle for edge-cases and there would be an increase in skin cancer deaths. It will be the same for risky pregnancies. Doctors should be the ones deciding which conditions are life-threatening based on their understanding of the condition, not lawyers based on politically charged drifting definitions of "life-threatening"


LowestKey

You think this ruling will only affect women? Oh you sweet summer child! The small government conservatives just declared that no American can have a right to privacy when it comes to medical decisions. States can make laws punishing people for any medical decision now, like refusing to get vaccinated, getting an STD, using the "wrong" medicine, or more. The floodgates are open and the sky is the limit with governmental overreach into our lives now. Brought to you by the GOP.


Sea_Space_4040

It's not just medical privacy. The right to privacy in the US is officially dead. People want to, "but China." Don't worry the US will be as bad as worse. I'm guessing it sooner rather than later. Also, I think many people cheering such decision will find that they don't meet the Christo fascist standard and will also suffer.


LavenderGumes

The supreme court believes states should be allowed to ban me from having a cavity filled, or a tumor removed, I guess.


quadmasta

At least one of your cavities


OrderlyPanic

> like refusing to get vaccinated Nah this same court will say that you can get out of any of those by claiming its a sincerely held religious belief. Of course they are also the arbiters of what a sincerely held religious belief is. Only *certain* rights of *certain* people are going away.


haven_taclue

Thomas wants to take a new look at same sex marriage. I wonder if they will go back to interracial marriage?


dinosauramericana

Rules for *thee* not for me


Dirkef88

Clarence is too much of a coward to ask for a divorce, so he's going to push the country to full authoritarian fascism so that the courts force his inter-racial marriage to be annulled. /s (I think)


BabyYodasDirtyDiaper

Ah, yes. Just like the king of England invented the Church of England because the Catholic Church wouldn't grant him a divorce.


SpiritJuice

It's very telling he won't revisit a supreme court case with similar precedent that affects him directly.


Get_Wrecked01

The midterms are gonna be spicy AF. I'm stocking up on popcorn now. Regarding my own opinion: I favor Government action that enshrines rights and freedom of self determination, so I'm not a fan of this decision in general. That has nothing to do with my opinion on when life begins, the morality of abortion itself, or any of that.


Jravensloot

So that's basically just pro choice. Being pro-choice does not make someone pro-abortion.


LightningSteps

It is just insane to me that for a lot of people supporting abortion ban it **is** like that. As if people would abort just for the fun of it...


SomeoneElse899

>As if people would abort just for the fun of it... My response to this would be, do you really want someone who would "abort for the fun of it" raising a child?


Jaytalvapes

Exaaactly. They always skip this point. Let's say the person really is your right wing nightmare. A black woman who has 6 kids, had 20 abortions, and gets a mountain of welfare. You're arguing in favor of giving her more kids and more welfare. Idiots.


rif011412

Not to be a punk. But you stopped before coming to a final conclusion. A terrible parent with 20 kids is not likely to have welfare if these people get full control. So those 20 babies have to earn their keep when they get taken away from the parent. Where would a bunch of fascists want to raise and use 20 undesirable kids? Probably somewhere they dont get to choose or have freedoms.


videogames5life

And its not like they are going to help get ths child adopted either once born.


HaworthiiKiwi

That is something that concervatives against abortion push. That people are having frivolous, unprotected sex, and using abortion as a backup.


Emotionless_AI

Clarence Thomas writes, in a concurring opinion, that the Supreme Court should reconsider Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell — the rulings that now protect contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage. Fuck Clarence Thomas


Sir_Green_Britches

>same-sex relationships To be clear, it was about sodomy *altogether.* Some states, like Texas, had sodomy laws that only applied to same-sex relationships but over a dozen states (my home of Florida included) had laws on the books that criminalized ALL sodomy (and some included oral sex in the definition). So the right to privacy that people hated in Roe was also protecting your personal right to bum-fun with the wife and in some cases, blowjobs. The state apparently has the right to govern your sexual practices.


BGgungame

Late at night. You and the lady get ready for some quality spicy time. Barry White playing in the background. Suddenly there’s a knock on the door. 2 police officers at the door. “Good evening citizens! We received a report that compilation might be happening here. As per the state’s laws you are aware we must make sure this act is both free of all contraception as well as any illegal substances, acts or positions. Now let us begin. Officer Smith will read you the state approved guidelines. 1. You may only do the missionary position. 2. No kisses allowed. 3. Avoid eye contact. 4. Oral, anal, foreplay and the use of items or aphrodisiacs is prohibited. 5. Avoid making unnecessary sounds. 6. Female orgasms are punishable by 200$ fine. 7. Music is prohibited, unless it’s the state anthem. 8. Copulation without clothes is prohibited. You may now start. You have 1-3 minutes to finish.”


BentGadget

>We received a report that compilation might be happening here. Is it a 'best of' Barry White album?


SamJackson01

Well, if you’re within 100 miles of the border they don’t have to knock….


mjrmjrmjrmjrmjrmjr

Copulation. ... COPULATION!!!!!


XerocoleHere

Some 1984 shit


allothernamestaken

I give it a year until Alabama or Mississippi passes a law outlawing any sex that isn't penis-in-vagina between a married heterosexual couple of the same race.


videogames5life

notice they didnt say it couldn't be your cousin.


Vondi

But I mean, that was clearly meant to be only enforced on Gay people? No one would investigate what goes on in a Hetero bedroom but ina Gay bedroom it would clearly be illegal for anyhing to happen?


AquaticAntibiotic

No one would investigate it, but they would tack it on in politicized prosecutions.


Kuges

I noticed that he left out Loving, I wonder why?


RicoHedonism

Obergefell is the window to Loving.


[deleted]

[удалено]


CommunityOrdinary234

Libertarians will not do a damn thing to protect anyone except issue them a weapon.


DLDude

And they will continue to vote republican


xole

I haven't voted republican for almost 30 years and that was once. Only democrats and libertarians. Between trump and this, it's going to stay that way.


vanulovesyou

The Republican claim that SCOTUS won't touch any of these rulings is such a lie, as much of a lie that Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, or Barrett wouldn't overturn Roe v Wade.


TurielD

It's going to be hilarious when they overturn Loving v. Virginia and Thomas is sitting there all confused


pleasedothenerdful

Thomas was married in DC which didn't have antimiscegenation laws, so he's fine.


bad_timing_bro

Just as everyone predicted once it was clear that abortion rights were getting thrown out the window. They're going for all the rights that conservatives despise.


Shanesan

Will the Free Market fix this?


EmuSounds

Dang I hope we have enough money to buy new politicians


Spats_McGee

Silk Road for abortion pills


_StreetsBehind_

Yep, they're coming for all of it now.


Productpusher

This is that great reset everyone on the right was crying about only it actually started by their dear leader


Lurker9605

Basically if you live in a blue state you can still get an abortion. Does this mean that other states can outright ban and jail people for getting an abortion? It’s hard to find an answer on Reddit without major hyperbole


vanulovesyou

> Does this mean that other states can outright ban and jail people for getting an abortion? Yes. It has already happened. Laws are already in place that defacto ban abortions, and laws were waiting in the wings for outright bans in many Republican-controlled states. And we've seen women this year prosecuted for having a miscarriage, so it's only going to get worse, especially if the right wingers who want the death sentence for "illegal abortions" get their way. This is reality, not hyperbole. If anything, the hyperbole has come from the anti-abortion side accusing anyone who's pro-choice as being "baby killers."


Head-Ad4690

Just to emphasize this, more than 20 states have laws on the books already that either already ban abortion the moment this decision was announced, or will do so quickly after some brief procedure like the state attorney general certifying that the law is now constitutional.


qp0n

The more important and concerning question is the very dangerous issue that arises regarding ['defense of others'](https://www.californiacriminaldefender.com/defense-of-others.html). If a state bans all abortions & recognizes a fetus as a person, it could be argued that it is legal to harm, detain, possibly even kill abortion doctors 'in defense of the fetus'. >The law of defense of others closely parallels the law of self-defense. This law allows you use force (even deadly force) to defend other people when you believe that they are in imminent danger. That is a poisonous can of worms that I hope never gets opened.


ixixan

What about letting pregnant women cross state lines and enter a state or country where abortion is legal?


qp0n

I think this is something that is being argued now, and might depend on each states' legislation. I'm not informed on what grounds or precedent exists that would allow or disallow it. I know some states are suggesting that they will make it illegal but I dont see how such a law could be constitutional or how it could be enforced. e.g. if i live in a state where cannabis is illegal for recreational use, go to Colorado, use it recreationaly, then return, there is no legal basis to charge me for a crime as far as i know.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Treskelion2021

Now wait and see how crime rates rise after 15-20 years. Here is the study - [https://law.stanford.edu/publications/the-impact-of-legalized-abortion-on-crime-over-the-last-two-decades/](https://law.stanford.edu/publications/the-impact-of-legalized-abortion-on-crime-over-the-last-two-decades/) More police state.


TwoMainstream

That's quite a stretch to assume unwanted children from broken homes and unfit parents would lead to troubled lives that steer them to a life of crime. /s


TeneCursum

You had me in the first half, not gonna lie


Anonymoushero1221

Right - banning abortion doesn't create more healthy humans, it just makes people poorer and creates more prisoners. Bad for the country, bad for individuals, but a good way for voters to pretend they are righteous.


EmuSounds

I mean that's the goal, isn't it?


Plenor

Good for companies that want low wage workers


ixixan

And repugs will campaign on being tough on crime. Win-win.


Haveyouseenmrgreen

Not a fan. The government is the worst arbiter of the worth of human life.


TryAnarchism

A consistent libertarian should be equally outraged at abortion control as they are with gun control


pewbdo

I feel like people take the killing babies argument at face value and never consider who benefits from banning abortion. A decent chunk of those seeking abortion are doing so because they can't afford a kid, are too young, or other circumstances making them unfit at the time to be a parent. This will lead to a larger proportion of children in the next generation who will have grown up poor, likely without a nuclear family, and any meaningful structure. The perfect recipe for a desperate populace that will turn to crime (whereby they'll be exploited for their labor and stripped of voting rights), only capable of low level minimum wage employment, or desperate for a way out (look at the military and their campaigns targeting low income groups for recruitment). The people running things could care less about babies, they need the desperate population to drive the machine, it just so happens religion can be weaponized to further their needs.


actually-aloof

Today seems like a good day to avoid the internet then.


o0BroomHilda0o

I want to but I can’t. If I do then I just keep letting it happen. We have to get angry! My eyes are wide open


thegreattaiyou

If I just close reddit maybe the ruling setting back reproductive rights half a century, and the opinion targeting contraception and homosexual relationships will just disappear!


KCGD_r

I really don't get why abortion is anyone's problem except for the parents and their healthcare provider. It's a very personal issue, which does not concern the opinion of any government or state officials. If you believe it's immoral, that's *your* personal belief. Stop trying to meddle with other people's lives.


ProfessionalOld9952

12/10 agree. And tax dollars shouldn’t be worried about it either


Aeon1508

States rights are and have always been a red herring for taking away individual rights.


CivBEWasPrettyBad

I believe there was a fairly uncivil war fought over the state's rights to override the rights of people with the incorrect amount of melanin.


TeenageDarren

**”The concurring opinion by Justice Thomas says in the future the court should also reconsider rulings that protected contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage.“** They blatantly stated they’re going after the gays next. Fuck the GOP.


Mke_already

I wonder why the black dude who's married to the white girl didn't say they need to reconsider interracial marriage?


graveybrains

He’s going for the most spectacular annulment in history


TheHillsHavePis

Because he knows he'll be long dead by then


CrunchyCheezPuffs

Don’t Tread On Me, or my uterus.


sadandshy

Best of luck, mods.


Wierd_Carissa

Best of luck, women seeking an abortion who aren't wealthy. And hijacking the top comment to add this monstrosity, courtesy of everyone's favorite -- Justice Thomas, concurring: >**For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.** lol


Plenor

>"The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision," Alito wrote in the ruling. Interesting. What else is not mentioned in the constitution? The Internet? Vaccines?


dpforest

“The concurring opinion by Justice Thomas says in the future the court should also reconsider rulings that protected contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage.” I’m ashamed of our Supreme Court today, and honesty I’m in fear for my safety as a gay dude living in rural Georgia.


skippynb

All women suffer over this. Sometimes abortions are life saving for the woman. Now they may die on the table while the doctor waits for "approval" . Young, older, rich, poor. You can still die when seconds matter. Cant travel to another state fast enough.


Remarkable-Motor7704

Almost immediately in the Conservative sub they started a “ROE V WADE IS OVER PARTY” thread Wonder how many of you acting upset are planning on voting with them in 2024?


Sugmabawsack

They’ll vote for them later this year


SlightlyJason

95% of this sub, cause most libertarians fit the stereotype of conservatives who like weed.


purefabulousity

They literally said they’re going for gay marriage next


Emperor_of_Cats

And so many here would love it because: 1. They'd rather have the state squash freedom than the federal government. 2. They say the state shouldn't be involved at all, but I guess they're fine with gay people not being legally allowed to marry until the state is no longer involved (never.) 3. They hate gay people. Pick any 3, multiples allowed.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ItchyCartoonist6048

Those are the same hand buddy. The federal gov’t was never controlling anyone’s body, it was controlling the states by prohibiting them to control peoples’ bodies.


ILiketoLearn5454

"There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation" -Pierre Trudeau I feel like there's no room for the state in the bed-wombs of a nation. Yea I stuck a joke in there, fuck it.


roboadmin

Fucking religious extremists


Neil_Armstrang

Moving the right to make a decision from individuals to state governments is not an act of libertarian “decentralization.”


[deleted]

Anal is about to become even more popular throughout the South and Midwest.


MadCervantes

Too bad this rolling back the right to privacy also opens the gate to enacting sodomy laws again ay?


Thotsnpears

Boo.


MCHENIN

I honestly think the SC intentionally leaked that poll that initially showed their decision to overturn RvW. It helped soften the blow and lessen the risk of major unrest. When people found out (via the leak) there wasn’t enough of a reason to riot because it had not happened yet and there was some doubt about it. From that moment until now it’s been an effort to slowly disclose this to the public.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


Justbrowsing267

More poor people babies in foster care. That’ll get expensive real quick


Bsdave103

Conservatives are rolling back almost 50 years of previous freedoms. We now have multiple judges on the Supreme Court who straight up lied to the American people when they said they would respect previously established law. Liars and religious nutcases sit on the highest court in our country and conservatives will somehow celebrate this as a "win" for freedom. In actuality its a very sad day for America.