The Supreme Court has been destroyed — and the perpetrator thinks he's the victim

[Into the Night]

The GOP-majority Supreme Court wreaked havoc on abortion access by overturning Roe v. Wade last June. But if you read The Wall Street Journal's recent interview with Samuel Alito, author of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision that overturned Roe, you might believe the justice sees himself and fellow Republicans as the true victims of their successful quest to eliminate the constitutional right to abortion.

Instead of discussing the unpopular Dobbs ruling itself, Alito focused on the leaked draft of his opinion, which he said made him and other Republican appointees "targets of assassination." While most people can agree that assassinating judges is bad (a person was arrested for allegedly attempting to kill Justice Brett Kavanaugh after the leak), focusing on the leak instead of the damage his opinion has brought and will bring lets Alito continue to play the victim while wielding power over his purported tormentors.

As for the leak itself, Alito, ensconced within the safe confines of the Journal’s opinion pages, asserted in the interview published Friday that he has a “pretty good idea” who did it. While he admitted it’s not enough proof to name the perpetrator — who prematurely provided what was about to become public knowledge — Alito expressed certainty that the leaker couldn't have been a conservative, but rather had to be someone who intended to change the opinion before it came out.

Yet, even if it was a liberal, the leaker may simply have wanted the country to know that this messed up thing was happening, regardless of whether they intended to set in motion some plot for a hit squad of other liberals to then kill the justices, who would undoubtedly be on higher security alert after the leak. (The man accused of planning to attack Kavanaugh was readily apprehended.) That theory, however, would require Alito to grapple with the substance of what his opinion actually did — strip away a popular right — rather than when people learned about it.

The Supreme Court followed the Constitution of the United States (for once!) in overturning Roe v Wade. The federal government as NO authority over abortion. The 10th Amendment therefore prevails.

The only havoc is created by people willing to murder their own children.

 

[Into the Night]

There is no Constitutional right to abortion if the Court says there isn’t. The author of this article is an idiot

The Court cannot change the Constitution. It has no say on giving the federal government power it doesn't legally have.
The federal government never had any authority over abortion, either to ban it or to endorse it. The 10th amendment prevails.

 

[Into the Night]

The Constitution is over.

Buckle Up.

It is not over. There are too many people that still uphold and support it, though you refuse to see it.

 

[martin]

you are welcome to come get mine any time you are ready

Thanks, appreciate the offer but I have one.

 

[Into the Night]

One definition of a debate "idiot" might be a member who fails to comprehend what is meant by "eliminate the constitutional right to abortion".

There is no constitutional right to abortion. Abortion is not a right.

 

[Hawkeye10]

It is not over. There are too many people that still uphold and support it, though you refuse to see it.

I see what is, not what I want to see, which makes me rather rare this deeply into this next dark age.

 

[Nordberg]

The Court cannot change the Constitution. It has no say on giving the federal government power it doesn't legally have.
The federal government never had any authority over abortion, either to ban it or to endorse it. The 10th amendment prevails.

The Supremes interpret the Constitution. I bet on a good day, you can see they decide what the Constitution says. Is it changing it? Of course, it is, they have made decisions and later have reversed them. You are so damn stubbornly stupid.

 

[Into the Night]

I see what is, not what I want to see, which makes me rather rare this deeply into this next dark age.

No. You only see what you want to see.

 

[Into the Night]

The Supremes interpret the Constitution.

They have no authority to.

I bet on a good day, you can see they decide what the Constitution says. Is it changing it? Of course, it is, they have made decisions and later have reversed them. You are so damn stubbornly stupid.

They have no authority to change the Constitution either.

 

[saltydancin]

The Constitution is over.

Buckle Up.

The US Constitution Bill of Rights was over when SCOTUS "one nation under God with equal justice under law" malfeasance of no decision on right or wrong ruling maintained that Christiananality pedophilia more perfect union to Islam Mohammed pedophilia thieving US Constitution Bill of Rights arsonists Federal Lynching KKK churchstate of hate fiefdom drug trafficking enforcement was the law of the land decades ago....

 

[christiefan915]

Yes, you're a fucking retard.

But as to the holy sacrament of abortion, there is nothing in the Constitution about abortion. Anything not enumerated to the federal government is the domain of the states - BUT you hate democracy - the idea that the people of the states decide for themselves, you want unelected judges to DICTATE law.

WHY do you Nazi democrats love killing the unborn?

Simple, they can't fight back.

democrats prey on the most defenseless members of society.

Why do you reactionary screwballs think that any government has control over a woman's personal medical decisions?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Why do you reactionary screwballs think that any government has control over a woman's personal medical decisions?

Why do you ghouls hate democracy?

The repeal of the unconstitutional law dictated by the Burger court placed the issue into the hands of the voters in the many states. But the idea that people vote to decide the issue outrages you ghouls.

 

[christiefan915]

Why do you ghouls hate democracy?

The repeal of the unconstitutional law dictated by the Burger court placed the issue into the hands of the voters in the many states. But the idea that people vote to decide the issue outrages you ghouls.

You're having comprehension problems. I don't care which government entity you're talking about... federal, state or local. It's not up to these strangers to make medical decisions for women, or to try to control what they do with their bodies.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You're having comprehension problems. I don't care which government entity you're talking about... federal, state or local. It's not up to these strangers to make medical decisions for women, or to try to control what they do with their bodies.

You have integrity problems. You can't ever be honest.

The question was posed - why do you hate democracy?

Why do you oppose letting voters decide?

Such is the nature of you fascists, despite the lies and filth you spew, you seek dictatorship.

 

[christiefan915]

You have integrity problems. You can't ever be honest.

The question was posed - why do you hate democracy?

Why do you oppose letting voters decide?

Such is the nature of you fascists, despite the lies and filth you spew, you seek dictatorship.

Quote me on "hating democracy." It's a loaded question, along the lines of "when did you stop beating your wife?"

I oppose letting some schmo in Bumfuck, AK tell me or any other woman what we should do with our bodies. That is a private, personal decision.

Why are you such a filthy, hateful misogynist?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Quote me on "hating democracy." It's a loaded question, along the lines of "when did you stop beating your wife?"

I oppose letting some schmo in Bumfuck, AK tell me or any other woman what we should do with our bodies. That is a private, personal decision.

Why are you such a filthy, hateful misogynist?

You are dumb as a lamppost. The attacks on the SCOTUS are purely driven by the outrage you Nazis have that the people be allowed to vote on the question of abortion.

You don't live in Arkansas - so what the voters there decide has no bearing on you. But YOU want to force your view on them - YOU view yourself as supreme and entitled to rule over others.

Fucking ghoul.

Oh, and if you want to pull your arms and legs off to die screaming in agony - I fully support your right to do so. But that isn't what you want. You want to pull the arms and legs off the most defenseless members of society. It isn't YOUR body that you seek to attack.

I take it you mourn every live birth. Hatred of life and hatred of the living - it is the ghoul way.

 

[Nordberg]

They have no authority to.

They have no authority to change the Constitution either.

And reality does not intrude in your bubble. https://harvardlawreview.org/forum/...n-means-what-the-supreme-court-says-it-means/ And, it is exactly what they do and have been doing since 1792.

 

[Into the Night]

Why do you reactionary screwballs think that any government has control over a woman's personal medical decisions?

RQAA. This question has already been answered.

 

[Into the Night]

Why do you ghouls hate democracy?

I hate democracy too. It's an unstable form of government. Minority opinions are no protected. There is no constitution. It is mob rule. I much prefer a republic, or government by constitution. Democrats want an oligarchy, not a democracy. They just use the term 'democracy' to try to make it 'sound good', even though democracies are unstable, usually dissolving into oligarchy or dictatorship before long.

The repeal of the unconstitutional law dictated by the Burger court placed the issue into the hands of the voters in the many states. But the idea that people vote to decide the issue outrages you ghouls.

This is quite true. Further, there are States that have decided that this type of murder is legal.

 

[Into the Night]

You're having comprehension problems. I don't care which government entity you're talking about... federal, state or local. It's not up to these strangers to make medical decisions for women, or to try to control what they do with their bodies.

Murder is not a right.