Stewart really doesn't like Casey. He says that Casey failed and is not a hallmark of this courts precedent.
Breyer presses him: You accept the stare decisis standards for deciding whether to overturn a case like Roe and you think those standards have been met?
Breyer presses him: You accept the stare decisis standards for deciding whether to overturn a case like Roe and you think those standards have been met?
Sotomayor pushes back on the idea that Casey failed: What hasn't been at issue for the last30 years is the linecasey drew at viability. The right of a woman to control her own body has been clearly set since Casey and never challenged.
Sotomayor cont'd: You want us to reject that line of viability and a dot something different. 15 justices over 30 years since Casey have reaffirmed the viability line. 4 have said no. 2 are members of this court. but 15 have said yes—of varying political backgrounds.
Sotomayor cont'd: Now the sponsors of the Mississippi bill said we're doing this because we have new justices on the Court.
Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts?
Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts?
Sotomayor cont'd: This case, like Brown v. Boar dof Ed. is entrenched in our society. We won't be able to survive if people believe that everything, including NY v. Sullivan (1st Amendment case)), including the 2d amendment is up for grabs.
Sotomayor cont'd: She says lots of people believe the court erred in seeing the 2d amendment as a personal right not a militia right. How does the Court survive?
SOTOMAYOR IS ON FIRE.
SOTOMAYOR IS ON FIRE.
Sotomayor: A small fringe of doctors believe pain can b experienced before cortex can be formed doesn't mean that there's been a change in science since Casey.
Stewart saying fetuses feel pain pre-viability. Medical consensus is that fetuses DO NOT FEEL PAIN until ~24 weeks.
Stewart saying fetuses feel pain pre-viability. Medical consensus is that fetuses DO NOT FEEL PAIN until ~24 weeks.
Mississippi asked the Court to consider fetal pain but it doesn't matter. The current law is that provability abortion bans are unconstitutional fetal pain be damned.
oooooh Sotomayor brought up Marbury v. Madison!
"there's so much that's not in the Constitution!"
She says it was novel at the time to say SCOTUS had the last word.
Marbury is the court's ballsiest decision. They up and decided they had the right to review acts of Congress.
"there's so much that's not in the Constitution!"
She says it was novel at the time to say SCOTUS had the last word.
Marbury is the court's ballsiest decision. They up and decided they had the right to review acts of Congress.
Sotomayor cont'd: There's a lot of stuff not in the Constitution. Why do we say that Roe and Casey are so unusual that they must be overturned.
Stewart: They didn't deduce the right to abortion from the Constitution.
Sure Brad.
Stewart: They didn't deduce the right to abortion from the Constitution.
Sure Brad.
So far Sotomayor and Breyer have been measured but you can tell they're pissed and think this is all bullshit.
Best moment so far was when Sotomayor asked Roberts: Can I finish my line of inquiry?
*glare*
*glare*
Barrett asks if SCOTUS sides with MS, would that threaten Griswold (contraception) Obergefell (same sex marriage).
Stewart says no.
HA.
lies.
Stewart says no.
HA.
lies.
Sotomayor is trying to get Stewart to delineate which cases are watershed cases.
"You're dissimulating when you say any ruling here would have no effect on other watershed cases. (i.e., Griswold, Obergefell, Brown.)
Stew: we'll always have a diversity of views.
SOTO: EXACTLY
"You're dissimulating when you say any ruling here would have no effect on other watershed cases. (i.e., Griswold, Obergefell, Brown.)
Stew: we'll always have a diversity of views.
SOTO: EXACTLY
Sotomayor cont'd: How is this not a religious view? How is MS's interest anything other than a religious view?
Sotomayor: When does the right of the women come into account? Women who are poor (75% of the population) and elect abortions before viability. They are put at greater risk of medical complications. 14 times greater risk for giving birth than getting abortion before viability. ‼️
Sotomayor was the first person to ask "what about women."
Here comes Kagan, Sotomayor's voice twin!
Here comes Kagan, Sotomayor's voice twin!
KAGAN: there needs to be a strong justification to rear precedent besides the fact you think the case is wrong.
Not much has canned since roe and Casey. people think it's right or wrong based on what they've always thought.
Not much has canned since roe and Casey. people think it's right or wrong based on what they've always thought.
Kagan cont'd: So the rationale behind those cases has something to do with autonomy, freedom, and dignity of women to pursue their lives, protect their bodily integrity To make decision most fundamental to the course of their lives.
Kagan cont'd: And always in those cases, there was an understanding that there were important interest in the other side in protecting the potential for life. There was a difficult question and a balance to be made.
Kagan cont'd:
Some people think they struck the right balance, some thought the wrong balance. We're in the same place...
Some people think they struck the right balance, some thought the wrong balance. We're in the same place...
Kagan cont'd: except for there's been 50 years of decision saying this is part of the fabric of women's existence in this country and that places us in a different situation than if you'd come into Court 50 years ago and made the same arguments.
YUP.
YUP.
Stewart whines about how there's been 50 years of human liiiiiiiiiives taken.
whatever man.
whatever man.
Oops! Let's try this one last time. Thread continues:
https://twitter.com/RewireNewsGroup/status/1466069353711869953
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
