Oh, do we.
This week, #SCOTUS issued its decision in Shinn v. Martinez Ramirez, which involved the ability of federal courts to step into state court criminal matters—which is how the criminal abortion cases of the future will be handled.
This week, #SCOTUS issued its decision in Shinn v. Martinez Ramirez, which involved the ability of federal courts to step into state court criminal matters—which is how the criminal abortion cases of the future will be handled.
https://twitter.com/SomePinko/status/1528827475286966273
In a 6-3 ruling, as many decisions go these days, the #FedSocSix voted to uphold a lower court decision to deny defendants David Martinez Ramirez and Barry Lee Jones their right to effective counsel. Because fuck precedent, again.
In this decision, #SCOTUS ruled defendants could not present new evidence during post-conviction proceedings—evidence their lawyers hadn’t presented—since they hadn’t raised the claims in state court.
Basically, this:
Basically, this:
https://twitter.com/jaywillis/status/1528764347610062849
We can’t ignore the irony of #SCOTUS saying that defendants can’t present new claims that could help them avoid execution, when they were more than happy to hear Mississippi’s request to reverse Roe even though it wasn’t raised in the cert petition.
https://twitter.com/AngryBlackLady/status/1529091140376440832
With all of the new and confusing criminal laws surrounding abortion, poor pregnant people are going to be saddled with lawyers who don’t know how to negotiate these laws either because they’re bad at their job or because the laws are super confusing. Either way, they’re fucked.
Since most prosecutions around violating abortion bans or self-terminating a pregnancy will be in state court, no good can come out of this—but a Sonya Sotomayor dissent, in which she calls the decision “perverse,” “illogical,” and just plain wrong, did. 
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
