SCOTUS open thread

I took the boys into the city today. We went to the museum of Natural History and to a Mexican restaurant for lunch. We watched the news there.

Open thread.

8 thoughts on “SCOTUS open thread

  1. We knew it was going to happen. I can only dream that people who are going to force women to have children when they don’t want to (often because they do not think they can care for them) will support those children.

    I expect medical abortion (mifepristone and misoprostol pills) to become much more common (and it is the most common form of abortion already). I don’t know what the medical consequences of the pills used after 10 weeks of pregnancy are (and we will learn, because they will be used).

    And, just last week, a Seattle area woman experienced the consequences of abortion bans on pregnant women, suffering a miscarriage in Malta, where abortion is banned and unable to get treatment until she was airlifted to Spain She was told to go to her hotel room to wait for an infection before they could treat her.

    The medical description suggests that she was fortunate to be airlifted for medical treatment, unlike Savita Halappanavar, who died of sepsis in Ireland and was the motivation for Ireland to change its abortion laws.


  2. I find it telling that the two “pro life”opinion pieces I’ve read today in The NY Times do not mention contraception once, even though they are supposedly about supporting women. Yet here in Colorado where long acting contraception is free, abortion rates plummeted. I honestly have never believed that these people really want to prevent abortion actually. They just want to make it difficult and dangerous (except for themselves-you know Justice Barrett could easily afford to get a safe one and I would not be surprised if she had as I certainly saw plenty of anti abortion protesters come in for abortions themselves when I did clinic defense.)


  3. I’m out of commission for another day doing stuff with Ian. At the Jersey shore now. Which is very frustrating because I want to be part of the conversation.

    My take is that the alliance of states and their people is slowly coming apart. I’m not ready to say that democracy is dead, but I do think we could be looking at a confederacy with 50 versions of democracy. I’ll expand more later.


    1. There’s no conversation to have. This isn’t about persuading people. It’s about the fall of democracy and the rule of law.


      1. ‘no hope persuading’ People find this topic very difficult, often no respect whatsoever for the other party’s prior assumption. You assume ensoulment is at conception – you are debating with a murder apologist. You assume ensoulment at viability, or at birth – you are debating with someone who is privileging a clump of cells over a woman’s life and freedom. And most people in my experience start about two steps in, with the assumptions in place.
        I do best in discussion if I ID my assumptions (ensoulment as a function of experience in the world, not at conception) and agree that my take would be different if I had different assumptions.


Comments are closed.