Agnostic.com

2 3

LINK In ditching Roe, Alito cites civil rights, minimum wage cases. Be afraid, says dissent. | Reuters

(Reuters) - Is the U.S. Supreme Court’s momentous ruling on Friday in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization the beginning of the end of deference to established precedent?

Certainly not in the view of the five justices who signed the majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, the 49-year-old case that assured a constitutional right to abortion, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the 1992 decision that upheld Roe's constitutional conclusion. Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the court's opinion, cited dozens of examples of cases in which the Supreme Court decided that its previous decisions were so “egregiously wrong” that they had to be undone....

snytiger6 9 June 26
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

2 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

True, they backed off of allowing slavery among other things. But it used to be that overruling precedent was for the benefit of human rights, not to reduce them. This ruling changed all that.

1

Thomas has said, and the others hinted, that they are on a mission to overturn and strip away all progressive civil rights. SCOTUS actions represent a direct violation of their oaths to uphold the Constitution, and they are participants in a judicial coup seeking to wage war against non-White Nationalist Christians.

I will coin a term here: WiNKs to refer to these ultraconservative neo-Nazi wannabes, WiNKs standing for White Nationalist Christians. Or maybe MAGA covers it...?

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:673770
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.