uspol 

People, not all people but most people, are angry about the wrong thing.

I agree that Roe v Wade being canceled is a bad outcome. I agree that women should have the right to their bodies, but here's my possibly unpopular take:

A Supreme Court that doesn't give a damn what the public wants ... is exactly what a Supreme Court is for, actually.

uspol 

The reason we even know the party allegiance of the Justices, the reason there is partisan court seat stacking etc is that the SCOTUS cares too much what the people or rather what the people's representatives think.

It's the politicization of everything. As another example the US appoints some of its District Attorneys by popular vote and that's just super weird for a role that is supposed to be administrative, meritocratic, bureaucratic.

uspol 

If a majority of the US supports the outcome of RvW, if the Dems support the outcome of RvW, if the Dems have Presidency, Senate and Representatives, then just fucking fix this the right way this time. Make a law instead of interpreting the law. You had 50 years.

Relying on an interpretation for 50 years is the failure. The definition of rights is political and should be solved through political mechanisms.

uspol 

@clacke no one would gave thought to codify a right that the supreme court had ruled on until recently though. If you'd tried to do this any time in the last 50 years you'd have democrats in conservative states in a really bad spot electorally and right now they just don't have the votes since their "majority" is effectively 48. Also, the house did vote on it like 6 years ago, but they haven't controlled the senate by a large enough margin for it to go further.

Follow

uspol 

@clacke Correction: I said 6 years off the top of my head but the house passed a national right to abortion as recently as last year after the Texas thing.

Β· Β· 0 Β· 0 Β· 1
Sign in to participate in the conversation
social.coop

A Fediverse instance for people interested in cooperative and collective projects.