Thread by @DirkSchwenk

Republicans sacrificed what they claim to believe "freedom from government" for what they actually believe "heavy handed government intervention and vigilantiism" and it should hang like an anchor on every Republican candidate forever. A thread.

SCOTUS has recognized the idea of a right to privacy: "The Constitution does not explicitly mention any right of privacy... [but we recognize] a right of personal privacy, or a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy, does exist under the Constitution."

Rs endless waive the flag of fundamental personal rights that are encompassed by the Constitution, even though they are not stated there. The Second Amendment is a great example - it talks about guns, but not as a private personal consitutional right.

Perhaps the high water mark for the right of privacy in the United States is the case I quoted above ROE V. WADE. "We, therefore, conclude that the right of personal privacy includes the abortion decision, but that this right..." can be regulated.

Republicans OF COURSE do not object to SCOTUS's decision that the right of personal freedom "must be considered against important state interests in regulation." They have instead regulated the right out of existence as of yesterday because they lie about what they believe.

When Republicans talk about personal freedom, what they REALLY mean is that some people should be able to engage in vigilantism, while others should viciously oppressed by governmental power. This plays out in voter suppression, drug war, stop and frisk, "stand your ground".

If you listen to Rs talk about January 6 - dangerous rioters trying to obstruct government are fine. But, of course, BLM protestors engaged in literally 1A protected activities should be targeted by LE. There is no defense for this - it's just Rs lying about what they believe.

And don't get me started David Brooks and his ilk putting a nice spin on it. Rs don't believe in a nation of equal laws, and they are perfectly happy to pay shills to paper that over.

The new Texas law is an extension of vigilantiism - it empowers individuals and groups to take it into their own hands to prevent a disfavored group from exercising their fundamental right of privacy. AND IT'S WORSE THAN YOU THINK.

Any person can bring a case against any person that performs or induces an abortion, including paying for or reimbursing costs EVEN IF THEY DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THE VIOLATION.

If proved, it's not $10,000 in damages, IT'S A MINIMUM of $10,000, which means a jury or judge could award more. Plus attorneys' fees.

This means that there is a significant incentive for vigilante religious nuts go after all abortion providers (or facillitators) and the burden of proof will be the provider to show IN EVERY CASE that the abortion was less than 6 weeks post fertilization. THIS WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE

The reality of this will be to shut down ALL abortion providers in Texas and everyone that tries to help. That will be the reality.

There are basically no defenses to these vigilante claims: not mistake; NOT EVEN THAT THE LAW HAS BEEN STRUCK DOWN IF IT IS LATER REVIVED.

No amount of frivilous suits can be punished by an award of attorneys' fees by a defendant, either.

Unless you are the incenstuous rapist impregnator, anyone can sue for fun or profit.

I don't really have words to describe how heinous this Texas bill is. There are many, many ways to decrease abortions - education and contraceptives first among them. This bill will do terrible things and create much misery.

Republicans have also green-lighted vigilantism in other areas. It flies in the face of all the "radical first amendment" types always in my feed when I talk about what a piece of shit idea "libertarianism" actually is. slate.com/business/2021/…

It's a beautiful Friday, and I intend to go out and enjoy it. Republicans are massively hypocritical liars that do the opposite of what they claim.

Dirk out.

If you dig this kind of thing, please follow. I try to add facts and perspective against the disinfo hurricane.