• PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is a Freedom of Speech type amendment that centers around a person’s reproductive rights

    Watch the Supreme Court challenge reproductive rights as free speech.

    • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      It doesn’t say reproductive rights are free speech, it says they are as important as free speech.

    • Kid_Thunder@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It would be hard for the current Supreme Court to actually rule the protection of abortion rights since they leave it up to the states. Interestingly, Alito basically wrote in a slant that was very pro-state’s rights to ban abortions specifically but it also does heavily imply to the point of being just shy of explicitly allowing the opposite but it must be what they meant or it doesn’t make actual sense.

      It would take a lot of logical gymnastics to essentially unwind and rewrite an opinion otherwise that doesn’t go against their own majority opinion. Saying that, they did perform some Olympian gymnastics on not only Roe v. Wade but also Planned Parenthood v. Casey or in some instances, outright just say that they were plainly wrong.

      They would essentially have to all but support a fundamentalist christo-fascist government (probably under the guise of what is in the best interest of the people, even against their own will) over even the Constitution itself and specifically the 10th Amendment and have a serious risk of impeachment unless he would opine that that it is the Congress’ business to supersede that (Article VI), because that would also run counter to his written opinion of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (that it is the state’s prerogative to regulate abortion and not the federal government’s), unless it was specific that he meant it all narrowed specifically to the 14 Amendment and further would run counter to his own weaker federal government stance.

      It would be far more likely for the SC to find that a state and its people have the right to regulate abortion as they see fit if they were even to decide to hear such a case.

      TLDR; it’d be extremely risky and difficult to essentially give the state’s the right to regulate abortion but take away unless those laws are only to ban them.