America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 6 weeks ago by Sunoverbeach. 275 replies replies.
6 Pages<123456>
Roe versus Wade Overturned!
rfenst Offline
#51 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,825
Why Florida isn’t losing the right to an abortion … yet

The real legal fight, in state court, is about to begin.


Tampa Bay Times
While the overturn of Roe v. Wade dramatically alters the landscape of abortion rights nationally, in Florida, the decision has no immediate effect on the legality of abortion.

That’s because Florida’s abortion laws have to fall within the boundaries of not one, but two constitutions, said Danaya Wright, a professor of law at the University of Florida.

The first is the U.S. Constitution, which no longer protects a person’s right to abortion following the U.S. Supreme Court’s bombshell decision this week in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

The second is the Florida Constitution.

47 words, one controversy
The difference in protections largely comes down to the 1980 inclusion of a 47-word amendment to the Florida Constitution guaranteeing the right to privacy.

“Every natural person has the right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into the person’s private life except as otherwise provided herein,” the document reads.

In the past, abortion protections at the federal level have been upheld through the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation that the U.S. Constitution contains a right to privacy, under which, they ruled, abortion falls.

But the U.S. Constitution doesn’t specifically include the word privacy in its text.

The Florida constitution does. In a 1989 case, the state’s Supreme Court ruled that the privacy clause covered the right to an abortion.

Florida’s new ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy has already been the subject of a challenge in state court. If politicians were to pass further restrictions — a bill banning abortion after six weeks, or an outright ban, for example — the result would be more lawsuits. If any of those lawsuits were to make their way to the state Supreme Court, the court would then need to overturn more than three decades of precedent to deem the restrictions legal.

“It’s a whirlwind of potential legal issues that aren’t going to be solved right away,” Wright said.

Still, Wright said, the possibility that the court could overturn the longstanding precedent isn’t out of the question.

Three of the seven current justices were appointed by Gov. Ron DeSantis during his first term. All seven were appointed by Republican governors.

What did voters mean in 1980?
In 1989, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that the state Constitution offered extensive protections for abortion rights. Its opinion was largely concerned with defining “privacy” in a constitutional sense.

“We can conceive of few more personal or private decisions concerning one’s body that one can make in the course of a lifetime,” the opinion read.

John Stemberger, a conservative lawyer who’s been a leader in the push to restrict abortion rights in Florida, said that court was litigating the wrong question. They should have been asking what voters understood “privacy” to mean when they approved the 1980 constitutional amendment, he said.

According to Stemberger’s research into the drafting process of that amendment, its authors were trying to protect the informational privacy of Floridians, he said.

“Nowhere in the record is the word ‘abortion’ mentioned anywhere,” Stemberger contended. “All the debate, all the discussion, all the editorials discussed informational privacy.”

Despite the absence of abortion-specific language in the final product, recent reporting by USA Today Network - Florida suggested one of the architects of the amendment had reproductive rights in mind while drafting it.

Should the courts decide at all?
Louis Virelli, an expert in constitutional law at Stetson Law School, said the fate of abortion policy in Florida should not be left up to an unelected court.

“If we want to change the last three decades of constitutional law in Florida, we should ask the voters, because we can,” Virelli said.

Florida has a process by which voters can directly change the language of the state Constitution through a referendum. Amending the Constitution requires the approval of 60 percent of the electorate. It’s been amended in the past after legislators failed to act on hot-button issues. The amendments on voting rights for convicted felons and the legalization of medical marijuana are two recent examples.

There is some precedent for voters adding abortion restrictions to the state Constitution. In 2004, nearly 65 percent of voters approved a measure allowing the state to pass a law requiring parents to be notified of a minor’s decision to obtain an abortion. In 2020, the Legislature passed such a law.

While most Florida voters say in polls that they want to protect abortion access, for the last quarter-century, they have also sent Republican majorities to Tallahassee — the party that is largely hostile to abortion rights.

On July 1, a new Florida law signed by DeSantis will go into effect banning most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. A recent poll from researchers at the University of North Florida found that a majority of Floridians are opposed to the 15-week ban.
zitotczito Offline
#52 Posted:
Joined: 08-21-2006
Posts: 6,415
What is the problem here? There are plenty of states that will allow the murder of unborn children. heck those states don't prosecute murder and gun crimes now. Want an abortion, move there and get the hell out of red states. Win-Win for both sides.
HockeyDad Offline
#53 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 43,503
bgz wrote:
I think most of you are gay, cause you clearly don't like women.


What is a woman?
rfenst Offline
#54 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,825
zitotczito wrote:
What is the problem here? There are plenty of states that will allow the murder of unborn children. heck those states don't prosecute murder and gun crimes now. Want an abortion, move there and get the hell out of red states. Win-Win for both sides.

"Get the hell out"?
Aren't you a tolerant human being.
HockeyDad Offline
#55 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 43,503
rfenst wrote:
Nearly 70% of the U.S. believes in the right to abortion.
Only 25% of the U.S. (lowest percentage ever) have a favorable opinion of SCOTUS.


It should be very easy for states to pass abortion laws with 70% support.
rfenst Offline
#56 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,825
HockeyDad wrote:
It should be very easy for states to pass abortion laws with 70% support.

It will probably take like 15-20 years in many states for a turnover in political control in state legislatures.
HockeyDad Offline
#57 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 43,503
rfenst wrote:
"Get the hell out"?
Aren't you a tolerant human being.


Maybe you don’t have to move there but at least come and visit. California will be funding abortions for people coming from out of state. We are an abortion sanctuary state. Incidentally SAn Francisco has the smallest population of children compared to any other large city.
rfenst Offline
#58 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,825
DOBBS, STATE HEALTH OFFICER OF THE
MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ET AL.
v.
JACKSON WOMEN’S HEALTH ORGANIZATION ET AL


It's 213 pages.
Read it for yourself: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf
HockeyDad Offline
#59 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 43,503
rfenst wrote:
It will probably take like 15-20 years in many states for a turnover in political control in state legislatures.


Who needs turnover? With 70% you just make it a state constitutional amendment and we can get back to playing whack a mole.
zitotczito Offline
#60 Posted:
Joined: 08-21-2006
Posts: 6,415
rfenst wrote:
"Get the hell out"?
Aren't you a tolerant human being.


I am testing out what it is like to be a Democrat.
Brewha Offline
#61 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 10,780
DrafterX wrote:
So, if I gotta travel to a different state to kill a baby will I have to buy an out of state license? Will it be good for the weekend or just for a day..?? Huh

Next time you get preggers Drafter 'ol buddy - you just let me know....
Brewha Offline
#62 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 10,780
MACS wrote:
How did we take away "reproductive freedom"? What does that even mean? Women are free to reproduce all they want. They just need to be more careful, because now they can't snuff out a life due to inconvenience.

If a women gets raped and does not want to carry the child to term - she should have that freedom, that right.

Kinda complex, ain't it macs?
Brewha Offline
#63 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 10,780
bgz wrote:
I think most of you are gay, cause you clearly don't like women.

Kind of obvious isn't it?
ZRX1200 Offline
#64 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 57,451
^ guys how did that tactic work for Hillary?
HockeyDad Offline
#65 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 43,503
I went to Costco today and did not see any abortion protests. You can get abortions at Costco in California. (Actually you can’t yet but I’ve got the proposal submitted. It’s gonna be killer)
HockeyDad Offline
#66 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 43,503
Brewha wrote:
If a women gets raped and does not want to carry the child to term - she should have that freedom, that right.

Kinda complex, ain't it macs?


Yes. That unborn child should be executed for the sin of its father. Somebody’s got to pay.
rfenst Offline
#67 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,825
Ending Roe is institutional suicide for Supreme Court


Noah Feldman,
Bloomberg Opinion

Modern constitutional law as we have known it ended Friday.

When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood, it repudiated the very idea that America’s highest court exists to protect people’s fundamental liberties from legislative majorities that would infringe on them.

What the dissent aptly called a “catastrophic” decision is not only a catastrophe for women, who now can be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies to term. It is a catastrophe for all Americans — and for people all over the world who have built their own modern constitutional courts on the U.S. model. The tyranny of the majority won the day.

The right to an abortion was based on the principle of a living Constitution that evolves to expand liberty and equality.

That same master principle of modern constitutional law provided the grounding for Brown v. Board of Education, ending segregation. It was the basis for Obergefell v. Hodges, finding a right to same-sex marriage. It is the same principle that undergirds dozens of other decisions establishing rights we today consider fundamental, from sexual freedom to stop and seizure, that were not considered similarly basic in 1791 when the Bill of Rights was ratified or in 1868 when the 14th Amendment was.

In place of the living Constitution that protects liberty and equality from the tyranny of the majority, the court in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization announced a Constitution that only protects rights that already existed in the distant past. The majority considered it irrelevant that the people who ratified the original constitutional provisions did not include women, whose rights are at issue in Dobbs and whose equality is derogated by the decision. According to the majority, the dead hand of the past rules our constitutional future.

It is no exaggeration to say that the Dobbs decision, written by Justice Samuel Alito and joined by four other conservatives, is an act of institutional suicide for the Supreme Court. The legitimacy of the modern court depends on its capacity to protect the vulnerable by limiting how the majority can infringe on basic rights to liberty and equality.

The Dobbs majority not only takes the court out of that business. It holds that the court should never have expanded the protection of liberty and equality in the first place.

The most basic argument of the Dobbs decision is that, in 1868, states did not consider abortion a fundamental right. That is accurate, as the magisterial dissent, co-authored by Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, acknowledges.

But in 1868, there was also no clearly established right to contraception. There were no Miranda rights to protect arrestees. There was no right to choose your own sexual partner, let alone to marry the person you love. And there is no definitive historical evidence that the people who ratified the 14th Amendment thought that doing so prohibited segregation. If you take Dobbs’s logic seriously, all the landmark decisions establishing these rights are wrong.

Will the court now undertake a major effort to revisit these core rights?

Alito’s majority opinion, which is not significantly different from his leaked draft, tries to suggest the court will not do that. Its only basis for that suggestion is to say that abortion is “unique” because it involves life. Justice Clarence Thomas, in a separate concurrence, called openly for revisiting rights to sexual freedom and gay marriage. The dissenters argued cogently that it is now open season on those and similar basic rights.

It is hard for me to imagine that the rest of the conservative justices actually plan to roll back many of our most fundamental rights. Unfortunately, that hardly matters. State legislatures can and will now pass laws that violate or eliminate those rights. The lower courts will have to adjudicate them. Ultimately the Supreme Court will have to weigh in again.

The reason all this will happen is that the court didn’t just overturn Roe. By overturning Casey, it called into question the core idea that the justices follow precedent. Casey stood for the idea that the court would uphold its past decisions absent a major, transformative reason to do so. Under Casey, lower courts would leave precedent in place. That norm is now gone. It’s open season on fundamental rights.

Finally, a dead, non-living Constitution is a catastrophe because history doesn’t actually limit the justices’ discretion. Originalism was supposed to deliver judicial restraint. It doesn’t. The majority can read history however it wants – and does. A conservative majority with no respect for precedent could easily be the most activist court we have ever had.

In short, the modern Constitution will never be the same. Neither will the Supreme Court. Dobbs will go down as one of the worst decisions in the court’s history. Dobbs reverses rights on which the whole country has relied for half a century. The court has never done that before. The consequences will be disastrous – and far-reaching.



____
Noah Feldman is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. A professor of law at Harvard University, he is author, most recently, of “The Broken Constitution: Lincoln, Slavery and the Refounding of America.”
CelticBomber Offline
#68 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,697
HockeyDad wrote:
Who needs turnover? With 70% you just make it a state constitutional amendment and we can get back to playing whack a mole.


I see you're perfectly willing to abort moles... Shame on you
Dg west deptford Offline
#69 Posted:
Joined: 05-25-2019
Posts: 2,819
Grace for mercy has been given us today

God bless Trump best POTUS ever in this accomplishment alone

Now if grace for grace
Our fellow citizens could see the gross error as our Justices have & actually save some families from normalized & subsidized abominable death

America's skirts are uncovered
& they are bloody

All those sentences missed their periods so I better stop
CelticBomber Offline
#70 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,697
Now we just have to get Republicans to care about these kids after they're born. Don't we want to get rid of the Dept of Education and social welfare programs because poor people suck?

Think
Brewha Offline
#71 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 10,780
ZRX1200 wrote:
^ guys how did that tactic work for Hillary?

Honestly Z, I have friends that are gay and I know it bothers them, but simply do not care if people are gay.

Kinda stupid that it is even a dis….

But the right sure thinks it is!
Brewha Offline
#72 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 10,780
HockeyDad wrote:
Yes. That unborn child should be executed for the sin of its father. Somebody’s got to pay.

You should speak out to protect the unconceived…
Brewha Offline
#73 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 10,780
Dg west deptford wrote:
Grace for mercy has been given us today

God bless Trump best POTUS ever in this accomplishment alone

Now if grace for grace
Our fellow citizens could see the gross error as our Justices have & actually save some families from normalized & subsidized abominable death

America's skirts are uncovered
& they are bloody

All those sentences missed their periods so I better stop

I can see you are popular with the ladies…
rfenst Offline
#74 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,825
zitotczito wrote:
I am testing out what it is like to be a Democrat.

Your test is failing miserably.
ZRX1200 Offline
#75 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 57,451
DC is too….
DrafterX Offline
#76 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 96,149
Dems are mad cause they might start seeing repercussions from doing their sisters... Mellow
ZRX1200 Offline
#77 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 57,451
Man I could go for DrafterX’s sister about now….
HockeyDad Offline
#78 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 43,503
Brewha wrote:
You should speak out to protect the unconceived…


Have their lobbyist give me a call.
DrafterX Offline
#79 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 96,149
Should I invest in coat hangers..??Think
HockeyDad Offline
#80 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 43,503
And unmarked vans and allley-front real estate.
HockeyDad Offline
#81 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 43,503
AirBnB-A. (7 day rental comes with a free abortion)
DrafterX Offline
#82 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 96,149
Noted... state funded I assume.. Mellow
HockeyDad Offline
#83 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 43,503
Are all the pro-choice rallies planned for this weekend considered “superspreader events?”
DrafterX Offline
#84 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 96,149
Of course not... that's only for GOP events... Mellow
Brewha Offline
#85 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 10,780
DrafterX wrote:
Should I invest in coat hangers..??Think

Profiting of the disenfranchised is a republican value….
MACS Offline
#86 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 75,480
Just saw a meme...

"We ain't seen democrats this mad since we took their slaves away!"
Stogie1020 Offline
#87 Posted:
Joined: 12-19-2019
Posts: 3,314
rfenst wrote:
Nearly 70% of the U.S. believes in the right to abortion.
Only 25% of the U.S. (lowest percentage ever) have a favorable opinion of SCOTUS.


Awesome. They can vote for state legislators who agree and pass state laws regarding it.
zody Offline
#88 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2005
Posts: 1,149
So now I can pre-order an abortion like stocks, waiting for it to come back to an all time high again, right?!
zody Offline
#89 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2005
Posts: 1,149
Wait, short calls on all the Trump f*c$* Nazis.
All the Trumpers are spuzzing in underaged tang, they know they can't get rid of the racist eggs now. Win, win. Suck right on to the face, and BLAMMO, right out of the gut. I need a smoke just thinking about it.
Speyside2 Offline
#90 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,049
SCOTUS is the final arbitrar. We live with their decision. Many people agree with the decision. There is a storm coming that those who like the decision cannot see. States that enact Totalitarian abortions laws may see the following effects.

Boycotts of the state.
A brain drain of proffesionals.
A loss of businesses.
A loss of jobs.
Their economy in depression.
And to much more to list.

I wonder, did they even consider the possibilities?
In this case a battle was won and another war was lost.
Dg west deptford Offline
#91 Posted:
Joined: 05-25-2019
Posts: 2,819
They thought ending slavery would ruin the economy too

It won't, but even if it did - the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil

Is nothing more important to us than mammon?

Abortion is a way bigger stain on America than slavery

But I guess the willfully blind see the right to life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness as totalitarian
JadeRose Offline
#92 Posted:
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,387
Speyside2 wrote:
SCOTUS is the final arbitrar. We live with their decision. Many people agree with the decision. There is a storm coming that those who like the decision cannot see. States that enact Totalitarian abortions laws may see the following effects.

Boycotts of the state.
A brain drain of proffesionals.
A loss of businesses.
A loss of jobs.
Their economy in depression.
And to much more to list.

I wonder, did they even consider the possibilities?
In this case a battle was won and another war was lost.



This is EXACTLY why I am totally for states rights to enact all the dumbass cracker laws they want to and why that belief completely pisses off all my liberal friends. Smart people won't live there and the ones that are currently there will leave. Smart businesses won't go there unless it's a dumping ground for all the low wage $hit jobs they have. These places will become (most are well on their way) 3rd world states and it makes it easier for people to identify where not to go. It'll take a while but timelines on these sorts of things are getting shorter and shorter. My own state (Missouri) will be at the leading edge. I'm glad on the back side of life and can ride it out.

BTW..this swings both ways. Ultra-liberal states will suffer the same fate. You couldn't pay me enough money to live in a place like San Francisco or Portland. Those places ae becoming post apocalyptic wastelands.

I think the next 20 years will decide the fate of the US. As it stands, The USA is no longer viable. Until we can get away from extremism and get back to common sense, we are doomed
bgz Offline
#93 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 12,736
Monsters always think they are on the right side of history... that's what makes them monsters.

Make no mistake... those rejoicing about this now are monsters.
tailgater Offline
#94 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 25,960
Speyside2 wrote:
SCOTUS is the final arbitrar. We live with their decision. Many people agree with the decision. There is a storm coming that those who like the decision cannot see. States that enact Totalitarian abortions laws may see the following effects.

Boycotts of the state.
A brain drain of proffesionals.
A loss of businesses.
A loss of jobs.
Their economy in depression.
And to much more to list.

I wonder, did they even consider the possibilities?
In this case a battle was won and another war was lost.


What about professional proof readers?
Speyside2 Offline
#95 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,049
I am pro life, but also realistic. Also, my faith should never, never become government law. Finally as far as money, I was taught to tithe 10% or more to show God my love and sacrifice.

My above point is about the possible devastation that may come to states that enact draconian abortion laws. Also, remember there is to be no state religion. Though this has been misinterpreted as to mean no interaction between church and state which is just crazy.
bgz Offline
#96 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 12,736
JadeRose wrote:
This is EXACTLY why I am totally for states rights to enact all the dumbass cracker laws they want to and why that belief completely pisses off all my liberal friends. Smart people won't live there and the ones that are currently there will leave. Smart businesses won't go there unless it's a dumping ground for all the low wage $hit jobs they have. These places will become (most are well on their way) 3rd world states and it makes it easier for people to identify where not to go. It'll take a while but timelines on these sorts of things are getting shorter and shorter. My own state (Missouri) will be at the leading edge. I'm glad on the back side of life and can ride it out.

BTW..this swings both ways. Ultra-liberal states will suffer the same fate. You couldn't pay me enough money to live in a place like San Francisco or Portland. Those places ae becoming post apocalyptic wastelands.

I think the next 20 years will decide the fate of the US. As it stands, The USA is no longer viable. Until we can get away from extremism and get back to common sense, we are doomed


Where's the like button.
tailgater Offline
#97 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 25,960
MACS wrote:
Just saw a meme...

"We ain't seen democrats this mad since we took their slaves away!"


Excellent!
tailgater Offline
#98 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 25,960
bgz wrote:
Where's the like button.


I ain't falling for that again.

bgz Offline
#99 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 12,736
Those pretending to be the champions of liberty are the ones trying to strip the most liberties...

I believe RayR would say this court has turned to the left.

Tyranical right in all it's glory.. your party just sh*t the bed. Everyone sees you for the liberty tramplers you are.

Libertarians... no, sh*t bag tyrants stripping liberties.

You guys have been exposed. Denounce the act or be lumped in with them. You obviously don't care about liberty for the American... hint... fetuses are not American.
RayR Offline
#100 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 5,929
Will somebody explain Ben's inane ramblings? Please?
He might have been hitting his free Biden crack pipe too heavily, but maybe there's another explanation. Anxious
Users browsing this topic
Guest
6 Pages<123456>