Texas Law could circumvent Roe V. Wade

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

That the US Supreme Court did nothing to stop this says what we need to know.

Might be time to start adding to the number of judges.

Then the R's will add some when they get back in the position to do so --- pretty soon you will have hundreds on the bench.......

And hey - they still die and retire - so whoever is in office gets to replace them......


Long term - adding members is a very bad idea...

Why would there be ‘hundreds on the bench’? You can always cap the number of justices by legislation (you know - like you always have). Simply because one party is in the majority doesn’t mean they’ll have the votes to increase the size of the court.

And I’m not sure it would be a bad idea in the long term. The number of SC justices has been increased more than once, didn’t seem to invite disaster.

Boru

[HappySkeptic]

The most common argument made by nutters who try to pass laws like these is also the most hypocritical: that life beings at conception, therefore a foetus is a person so abortion is murder. They don’t believe it, and they KNOW they don’t believe it.

Boru

The Catholic church officially DOES believe this.  A soul is created at the moment of conception, and therefore for every egg that gets a sperm, that soul will eventually knock on the gates of heaven, and will help condemn those who helped with an abortion.

[onlinebiker]

Then the R's will add some when they get back in the position to do so --- pretty soon you will have hundreds on the bench.......

And hey - they still die and retire - so whoever is in office gets to replace them......


Long term - adding members is a very bad idea...

Why would thecre be ‘hundreds on the bench’? You can always cap the number of justices by legislation (you know - like you always have). Simply because one party is in the majority doesn’t mean they’ll have the votes to increase the size of the court.

And I’m not sure it would be a bad idea in the long term. The number of SC justices has been increased more than once, didn’t seem to invite disaster.

Boru

Ok bub... You know not of what you speak.

Cap the number " like we always have"?

There is no limit. The number of justices is not spelled out in the Constitution. 

The problem is tit for tat. When the balance of power shifts ( and it always does) the party with power is tempted to change things to favor their party.

If the Dems up the ante to say 12 justices to "balance things out" next time the Pubs are in charge it will be 15. Then 18. Then 24. Ect ect ect.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Why would thecre be ‘hundreds on the bench’? You can always cap the number of justices by legislation (you know - like you always have). Simply because one party is in the majority doesn’t mean they’ll have the votes to increase the size of the court.

And I’m not sure it would be a bad idea in the long term. The number of SC justices has been increased more than once, didn’t seem to invite disaster.

Boru

Ok bub... You know not of what you speak.

Cap the number " like we always have"?

There is no limit. The number of justices is not spelled out in the Constitution. 

The problem is tit for tat. When the balance of power shifts ( and it always does) the party with power is tempted to change things to favor their party.

If the Dems up the ante to say 12 justices to "balance things out" next time the Pubs are in charge it will be 15. Then 18. Then 24. Ect ect ect.

I never said it was spelled out it the Constitution, but it IS spelled out in legislation. And you HAVE capped it at different times with different pieces of legislation - the number has ranged from a low of 5 to a high of 10.

You should look stuff up before playing that ‘you don’t know what you’re talking about’ card.

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

The most common argument made by nutters who try to pass laws like these is also the most hypocritical: that life beings at conception, therefore a foetus is a person so abortion is murder. They don’t believe it, and they KNOW they don’t believe it.

Boru

The Catholic church officially DOES believe this.  A soul is created at the moment of conception, and therefore for every egg that gets a sperm, that soul will eventually knock on the gates of heaven, and will help condemn those who helped with an abortion.

It may be the official position of the Church, that doesn’t mean they believe it. There’s rather a simple test for this.

Boru

[HappySkeptic]

If the Texas law is found to be constitutional, then any State could make any law about your own body, and then award a 10,000 dollar bounty (minimum) to anyone who wants to sue you.

Want to stop illegal drug use? Offer a free $10,000 dollars to anyone who rats out a drug user or their friends. Have everyone spy on their neighbors in the hope of getting a payday.

This is an insane law with an insane method of enforcement. I will never set foot in Texas, ever, and I hope the businesses moving their headquarters to Texas will reconsider.

This is the Christian Taliban.

[no one]

Funny how these sanctimonious asshats preach about personal choice being revered, yet they seek control the personal choice of those that clash with their holier than thou judgemental doctrine.

[onlinebiker]

Where the zealots will hit a snag on this in they will not be able to prove injury.


To sue somebody in civil court you have to be able to prove how it affects you adversely.


Just because your invisible buddy doesn' t approve of your neighbor' s business isn' t actionable.

[arewethereyet]

Well now here in Texas we have permitless carry...no need for weapons training or anything else.

I suppose any shooters better make sure they don't shoot a newly pregnant woman.

But on the bright side, we are a little more lenient with medical marijuana.

It's a beeyouutiful day in the neighborhood.

[HappySkeptic]

It sounds like abortion is still legal before 20 weeks in Texas. This law just allows anyone, no matter who, to sue anyone that provides, helps, counsels, or has anything to do with an actual abortion.

Injury isn't required by this law, and defendants have no recourse from frivolous suits -- that's built into this law. Anyone could be sued by 1 million people, and if one person got paid, you would still have to pay out the other 999,999. Likewise, if one person's suit was thrown out due to lack of evidence, all the other suits with the same evidence will still go forward, and have to be thrown out individually.

This cannot stand as a legal principle, no matter whether its about abortion or anything else.