- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 64,267
...
an official ruling in the case could come any time over the next two months.
...
Great, two months of agitprop.
...
an official ruling in the case could come any time over the next two months.
...
Does this fucknut even grasp the fact that, under the 9th and 10th amendments in the Bill of Rights, this is exactly how it is supposed to work?
...
People keep talking about how overturning Roe and Casey would leave abortion laws up to the states, as if federal abortion laws would no longer be possible. I don't think that's true. It doesn't follow from SCOTUS overturning Roe and Casey that they would also overturn federal abortion laws that are enacted by a legislative process as opposed to a judicial one. Alito's opinion repeatedly complains that Roe and Casey were instances of the court taking on legislative powers and says that overturning them would return the issue of abortion laws to its proper place of legislatures. It doesn't say that these have to be state legislatures and not federal.
What? Use the commerce clause? Spending power? what? how? Using the already stretched commerce clause might break it and your house of cards will come tumbling down.
People keep talking about how overturning Roe and Casey would leave abortion laws up to the states, as if federal abortion laws would no longer be possible. I don't think that's true. It doesn't follow from SCOTUS overturning Roe and Casey that they would also overturn federal abortion laws that are enacted by a legislative process as opposed to a judicial one. Alito's opinion repeatedly complains that Roe and Casey were instances of the court taking on legislative powers and says that overturning them would return the issue of abortion laws to its proper place of legislatures. It doesn't say that these have to be state legislatures and not federal.
It's hilarious watching these people chant my body my choice when they want to cut people out of society for not wanting to take an unsafe and ineffective experimental vaccine.
They're already on it ...
https://twitter.com/JohnFetterman/status/1521299340169560065
![]()
... and the sniping and backbiting has already begun ...
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1521530328397099008
![]()
I'm not arguing against you, but [...]

[...] my first reaction was: Why now after 50 years? What are they hiding? What do they want to stir up? This may be the start to end the filibuster and pack the court.
You might have confused their opinions. They would probably say it is your choice to wear masks or get the vaccine but if you do not get the vaccine you should not be allowed in public. Just an FYI the science is in on this and it is not up for discussion or debate.
My thoughts exactly!
HYP. O. CRITES.
AntiFederalist • 5m ago
Good post. That list includes being inoculated with an ineffective and dangerous "vaccine" against my will, right?
I'm not sure what that means. Why would I think you are arguing against me?![]()