A development shocking for its immediacy if not wholly unexpected, Politico reporting via an unprecedented leak that the U.S. Supreme Court has voted to overturn both Roe v. Wade and its affirming subsequent decision Casey v. Planned Parenthood, throwing abortion rights into jeopardy across the nation where statutory and/or constitutional protections do not already exist, and triggering total bans on the procedure in a number of states:
The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes.
“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” he writes in the document, labeled as the “Opinion of the Court.” “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
Deliberations on controversial cases have in the past been fluid. Justices can and sometimes do change their votes as draft opinions circulate and major decisions can be subject to multiple drafts and vote-trading, sometimes until just days before a decision is unveiled. The court’s holding will not be final until it is published, likely in the next two months…
That we are even reading this draft decision is indicative of something very unusual going on behind the scenes, reflecting the gravity of the situation:
No draft decision in the modern history of the court has been disclosed publicly while a case was still pending. The unprecedented revelation is bound to intensify the debate over what was already the most controversial case on the docket this term.
We’ll update as local reaction comes in. This is a moment both long foreseen and long denied could ever happen by Colorado Republicans seeking to win elections despite their records in this avowedly pro-choice state. Having passed legislation codifying abortion rights in statute just this session and already seeing huge increases in patients coming to Colorado, our state is now a haven for abortion care that will soon be unavailable to millions of Americans.
And why is this happening? Because you were lied to, voters of Colorado. Authoritative voices you thought you could trust like the Denver Post’s editorial board told you that “[Cory] Gardner’s election would pose no threat to abortion rights,” and then Cory Gardner went on to vote for three right-wing Justices in his single term that undid conventional wisdom and made the “unthinkable” today’s reality. More than any other factor under the control of Colorado voters, that is why we are here today.
If nothing else, the consequences of ever letting a mistake like Cory Gardner happen again should be plain.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: Ben Folds5
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: Genghis
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: ParkHill
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: ParkHill
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: joe_burly
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: kwtree
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: spaceman2021
IN: BREAKING: Matt Gaetz Pulls Out Of AG Nomination
BY: Duke Cox
IN: BREAKING: Matt Gaetz Pulls Out Of AG Nomination
BY: notaskinnycook
IN: BREAKING: Matt Gaetz Pulls Out Of AG Nomination
BY: notaskinnycook
IN: BREAKING: Matt Gaetz Pulls Out Of AG Nomination
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
Can one assume Kavanugh’s defense to Susan Collins on this being settled law will be, “I was shit-faced”??
Lucy says: "Fool me once, fool me twice, fool me a hundred times."
I will never forget that ditzy statement Collins made when explaining her vote on Kavanaugh: "But he respects precedent!"
Yeah, as an intermediate appellate judge, he had no choice but to respect precedent. As a Supreme Court justice, he makes the precedents.
I don't know what was worse: that or her statement explaining her vote to acquit Trump in his first impeachment trial when she said, "I think he's learned his lesson."
I'm hoping Collins will be the poster child for why people ought not vote for "reasonable Republicans."
Her statement today
But there are no "do-overs" on judicial confirmations, Nor is there any tribunal that holds Supreme Court Justices to a Judicial Code of Ethics.
The only ray of sunshine on this matter is Chief Justice Roberts, commenting on the leak, says
But the Denver Post told us that Cory Gardner would not do this ….
Were they being untruthful to us?
The “editorial board” doesn’t run the paper. As the late Editorial Page editor Sue O’Brien said when The Post endorsed Bill Owens for governor over Gail Schoettler:
“The editor of the editorial page has one vote. The editor of the whole paper has two votes. The publisher has three votes.
” And the publisher breaks ties. “
Yep, this sums it up pretty well:
And I remember all the post-election complaints that Udall had focussed too much on the abortion issue. I agree that a good campaign should focus on multiple issues that address the needs and desires of multiple constituencies.
Not to blame women or young people as a demographic, but if you care about an issue, you need to engage yourself in the process. Tell your friends, put your money and effort in. Too often I hear that both parties are the same or that my personal efforts won't have an effect.
Absolutely true. Mark Udall can now have his “I Told You So But Nobody Listened” moment.
All I can think about are the sexually assaulted young girls – often assaulted by a relative – who could be forced to carry a fetus to term. I'm talking about YOUNG assault victims, sometimes as young as 10, 11, 12 – I know from working for years in a child protection-related field.
This country is headed in a truly horrifying direction.
November just got turned inside-out and shaken. No sleepy mid-term election wll this be. Furious pro-choice women and the men who love them will flock to the polls to turn out anti-choice candidates and incumbents. And, once again, the right-wingers did it to themselves.
Cook, I hope you are right.
I am just afraid that when swing voters are confronted with paying more for gasoline and food versus a constitutional right, the empty stomach and gas tank will drive the decisions of too many people.
Here's a suggestion for the Dems: why not work on a plan to address inflation AND talk about the overruling of Roe. It is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time.
I'll ask: when has ANY action of Congress been able to do much of anything against a global inflationary spiral? Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and its 38 national members benchmark a variety of issues. Using the most recent available data:
all OECD — food up 10%, total up 8.8%, and core (no food and energy) is 5.9%
US — food up 10%, total up 8.5%, and core is up 6.5%
The Fed will act on interest rates — probably 0.5% in the meeting this week — in an attempt "to discourage spending just enough to bring down inflation, without tipping the economy into recession — what economists call a "soft landing." That will mean variable rate loans and new loans will pay more. If it DOES trigger a recession, as many are anticipating, we'll be back to higher unemployment, too.
There have been about 50 million abortions since Roe. That’s 50 million voters that have been branded murderers. Okay, some are dead, some had multiple abortions, and some were already voting Democrats. Call it 20 million new Democratic voters./p>
I hope the cook is right. Mitch has to be doing his numbers all over again.
I think you may be underestimating the conservative ability to carve out exceptions for themselves.
If there is a silver lining here I believe the dynamics of the mid-terms just got turned upside down. We never seem to “miss a chance to miss a chance” but the narrative won’t be suffocated entirely by their framing of inflation / gas price. BTW, I read somewhere yesterday that homeowners nationally are benefitting from a $6 trillion windfall as housing prices rise and equity expands. Out east we have the usual suspects complaining about the price of inputs while they’re simultaneously forward contracting their crops at prices never seen before.
What other precedents are on the Top 10 list to be overturned?
Off the top of my head: Griswold v. Connecticut, Eisenstadt v. Baird, Lawrence v. Texas, Windsor v. U.S., Obergefell v. Hodges, and any other decision predicated on a right to privacy.
Griswold and Eisenstadt; SCOTUS decisions that affirm a right to access contraception; are already getting attention from far right politicians as a “violation” of states rights.
(just noticed that Cook beat me by two minutes)
Loving v. Virginia has also gained some attention.
Oops, CHB, I omitted Loving. I meant to include it.
Cookie, you always include loving
I wonder how Clarence Thomas will view reconsideration of Loving.
Why stop there? Heart of Atlanta Motel, Brown, Miranda, Gideon–is there an end to the raw originalist madness? And the 2024 election could well lead to the adoption of the independent state legislature doctrine.
Now, how does "O, Canada" go?
O Canada, you're somewhat north of us.
Thanks for the much needed laugh, V!
When what's left of the Denver Post finally dries up and blows away, the world will be a slightly better place.
Let's continue our trip down Memory Lane with video apropos of Michael's reference to Susan Collins and her 2018 statements about the right to choose being safe in the hands of the rapey alcoholic manbaby.
Maybe stare decisis only applies to lower level Courts. The Supreme Court is more like the Pope. With a direct line to god, you decide to do anything you like.
That is a very apt analogy. Their decisions aren't controlling because they are right or sound, but because they are final.
Heather Cox-Richardson is good this morning, May 2, 2022.
…
Boom. Five unelected aristocrats-for-life, three of whom were appointed by a con man who lost the popular vote to Hillary by three million votes and confirmed by a Senate majority that represents far less than 50% of this country.
As expected, many far-right politicians are decrying the "leak." Fascists gonna fascist
Analysts and pundits say this leak has ruined the legitimacy of the court ? Seriously? One Justice tried to rape a girl and another harassed women and then helped his wife plan a coup. One seat was stolen by Mitch. Five of the justices have been appointed by a POTUS who lost the popular vote.
KKKeeerist on a pogo stick (thanks, V)
"Analysts and pundits say this leak has ruined the legitimacy of the court? Seriously?"
And let's not forget that Bush v. Gore case decided in 2000.
Best response I've seen all day … All those outraged seem believe there SHOULD be a right to privacy.
The analogy of the dog who finally catches the car comes to mind. Republican dreams of retaking Congress are now exposed to forces beyond their control. Maybe the court can release their decision on May 9th. Pyrrhic parades around the world.
Protesters are assembling at courthouses and Federal buildings today at 5 pm. I don't think I'll drag my grandkids out to a protest this evening, but I'm sure there will be ample opportunities to do so in the coming months. The erosion of bodily autonomy and privacy will affect their future lives.
It sucks that we have to do all this again.
I'm saving protest for when there is a final decision announced — probably late in June.
It is possible the RWN wing of the Supreme Court won't fully agree and result is a decision on the 13-week ban is clear but there is no full override of Roe. The worst outcome will have been muted by moderate concurring opinions (I fully expect one from Roberts).
Vote Blue…No Matter Who.
Hahahahahaha
Kate Riga at TPM points out that "Alito's draft opinion sets the terms for outlawing abortion everywhere."
Also from Kate Riga "The Draft Opinion Is An Untempered Victory Lap Reveling In Roe’s Demise"
I think this draft is a Trial Balloon that was released by Alito or one of the Christian Nationalist Justices.
Agreed. Leaked by an insider