Roe v Wade has been overturned

Sterica

Roe v Wade was overturned on June 24th, ending a nearly half-century precedent on abortion rights.

The Good News: Abortion is not banned on a federal level; it’s up to those states
The Bad News: A lot of those states want to ban abortion

So here are some resources to help if you need it. It’s a very early draft so bear with me, and feel free to PM suggestions.

Federal Protections
Attorney General Garland has stated that states cannot ban the abortion pill mifepristone, but since the ruling I imagine most anti-abortion states will give the fed a middle finger and ban it anyways. Then comes the lawsuit that they will be confident the SCOTUS will rule in their favor, the actual law be damned.

Biden is trying to codify Roe with a bill, but the last time it happened it was blocked by the gruesome twosome in the Senate. And it would definitely get filibustered, so don’t hold your breath.

States Banning Abortion Soon

Many states have laws or other legal triggers that ban abortion once abortion laws go back to the states. An asterisk(*) means the state has already outlawed abortion. A caret(^) denotes a six-week bans, which I still count under banned as that is in no fucking way reasonable. Still, it may help someone to know.

Alabama*
Arizona (15-Week Ban, but a majority of providers, including Planned Parenthood, have paused abortion services)
Arkansa
Georgia^
Idaho (to be banned 30 days from 6/24)
Kentucky*
Louisiana*
Mississippi
Missouri
North Dakota
Ohio^
South Carolina^
Tennessee (to be banned 30 days from 6/24)
Texas
Utah*
West Virginia* (technically not banned, but last abortion clinic in the state has stopped providing abortions
Wyoming (Has to happen within 30 days of the ruling

States Where Abortion is Legal But Vulnerable

For now, abortion is legal, but there’s already been discussion for restrictions or outright bans.

Florida (15-Week ban begins July 1st; Governor announced desire to expand “pro-life” protections)
Iowa (Legal, but state supreme court overturned the state constitutional right to abortion)
Kansas (Legal, but vote Aug 2nd to see if it stays a constitutional right)
Michigan (Legal, but court battles have been ongoing
Nebraska (Governor pushing for ban)
North Carolina (Legal, but November election could bring in anti-abortion governor or veto-proof legislature )
Pennsylvania (Legal, but Republican candidate wants it banned)
Virginia (Governor wants a 15-week ban; state legislature is split)
Wisconsin (Has a century-old law that could kick in

States With Abortion Protections

These states either have abortion protections in their laws, or have expressed no interest in restricting access.

Alaska
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delawre
Hawaii
Illinois
Maine (Governor declared protection of abortion rights)
Maryland
Minnesota (Governor announced there will be no changes)
Montana
Nevada
New Hampshire (Has 24-week ban, but governor declared no changes to existing laws)
New Jersey
Oregon
Rhode Island
Vermont
Washington




Fuck this shit.

TankHammer

Blood-shooting-from-eyes furious and also totally dejected. Fuck this country.

The Judge

Haven't gone for a morning run fueled by rage in a bit but I guess that changes today.

Fuck those ghouls.

Brainleech

I am just disappointed and dismayed
As how does voting fix this? Why can you not flush the court? By flush i mean remove and replace.

Midnite

So I guess we just have 6 unelected lifetime kings that are gonna install a white christian theocracy while the opposition party talks about decorum and donations.

Magell

The only 'fix' is for state legislations to say we don't give a shit and keep abortions legal in their states. I'm sure they'll challenge that in the courts too, but who knows what will happen with those cases.

BahamutZERO

Brainleech wrote: »

I am just disappointed and dismayed
As how does voting fix this? Why can you not flush the court? By flush i mean remove and replace.

Because the only way to legitimately remove federal supreme court judges is impeachment, which requires a majority vote in the house to bring charges and a two-thirds vote in the senate to convict, and ha ha yeah no.

DouglasDanger

Midnite wrote: »

So I guess we just have 6 unelected lifetime kings that are gonna install a white christian theocracy while the opposition party talks about decorum and donations.

Yeah, I don't know we get out of this with electoral politics

Quetzi

BahamutZERO wrote: »

Brainleech wrote: »

I am just disappointed and dismayed
As how does voting fix this? Why can you not flush the court? By flush i mean remove and replace.

Because the only way to legitimately remove federal supreme court judges is impeachment, which requires a majority vote in the house to bring charges and a two-thirds vote in the senate to convict, and ha ha yeah no.

The only way that we can discuss on the forums, you mean

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Magic Pink

Straightzi wrote: »

BahamutZERO wrote: »

Brainleech wrote: »

I am just disappointed and dismayed
As how does voting fix this? Why can you not flush the court? By flush i mean remove and replace.

Because the only way to legitimately remove federal supreme court judges is impeachment, which requires a majority vote in the house to bring charges and a two-thirds vote in the senate to convict, and ha ha yeah no.

The only way that we can discuss on the forums, you mean

dude seriously don't even start this

it's way too dangerous

The Geek

https://twitter.com/fordm/status/1540338064324698112

Beef Avenger

https://twitter.com/GravelInstitute/status/1540347369111392256

Anzekay

I swear they've been dropping fuckawful rulings every day or two for the past weeks just to exhaust everyone by the time this dropped

Sweeney Tom

DouglasDanger wrote: »

Midnite wrote: »

So I guess we just have 6 unelected lifetime kings that are gonna install a white christian theocracy while the opposition party talks about decorum and donations.

Yeah, I don't know we get out of this with electoral politics

"More electoral politics!"

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1540343380261076992

Pay no attention to the fact she endorsed and actively campaigned for an anti-abortion House Dem literally last month

Quetzi

Anzekay wrote: »

I swear they've been dropping fuckawful rulings every day or two for the past weeks just to exhaust everyone by the time this dropped

Oh absolutely

I think it's a little bit of exhaustion, and a little bit of knowing that this one was a big fucking deal (at least partially because it already was a big deal from the leak) and using it to paper over the heinous shit they did yesterday

Javen

You can add more judges with a substantially smaller consensus; the number of justices isn't codified anywhere, there can be as many people as the current party in power feels necessary.

If a simple majority were possible, they could seat 9 more members who agree with them. It would then require a 2/3rds majority from the opposition to get rid of any of them.

Unfortunately the Democratic Party it itself extremely conservative, so I suspect that even if you somehow got 70 Senators with Ds in their name, you'd still struggle to find 50 that would go along with it, due to not being appropriately 'civil'

Sweeney Tom

Anzekay wrote: »

I swear they've been dropping fuckawful rulings every day or two for the past weeks just to exhaust everyone by the time this dropped

They still have eight to go, we haven't even gotten to the one that'll stop the EPA from being able to regulate climate change pollution

Hobnail

Magic Pink wrote: »

Straightzi wrote: »

BahamutZERO wrote: »

Brainleech wrote: »

I am just disappointed and dismayed
As how does voting fix this? Why can you not flush the court? By flush i mean remove and replace.

Because the only way to legitimately remove federal supreme court judges is impeachment, which requires a majority vote in the house to bring charges and a two-thirds vote in the senate to convict, and ha ha yeah no.

The only way that we can discuss on the forums, you mean

dude seriously don't even start this

it's way too dangerous

Dangerous compared to what

Lindsay Lohan

Beef Avenger wrote: »

Fundraising Tweet

I'm a registered Democrat, but this is entirely why I've removed myself from every mailing list they have. Anytime something bad happens their answer is to ask for money. Money doesn't help everything. They spent a ton of money here in Maine to support their shitty competition to Susan Collins and it made no difference and now our state is very much responsible for this outcome, despite our state statistically being prochoice.

Magic Pink

Hobnail wrote: »

Magic Pink wrote: »

Straightzi wrote: »

BahamutZERO wrote: »

Brainleech wrote: »

I am just disappointed and dismayed
As how does voting fix this? Why can you not flush the court? By flush i mean remove and replace.

Because the only way to legitimately remove federal supreme court judges is impeachment, which requires a majority vote in the house to bring charges and a two-thirds vote in the senate to convict, and ha ha yeah no.

The only way that we can discuss on the forums, you mean

dude seriously don't even start this

it's way too dangerous

Dangerous compared to what

don't play dumb; we all know they have lists and have used them

Anzekay

Straightzi wrote: »

Anzekay wrote: »

I swear they've been dropping fuckawful rulings every day or two for the past weeks just to exhaust everyone by the time this dropped

Oh absolutely

I think it's a little bit of exhaustion, and a little bit of knowing that this one was a big fucking deal (at least partially because it already was a big deal from the leak) and using it to paper over the heinous shit they did yesterday

I'm just tired from a long day of work today but also I just... felt this wave of exhaustion roll over me as soon as I saw the news

When you've been simmering with rage for so long every new development just drains something else instead

Anzekay

Sweeney Tom wrote: »

Anzekay wrote: »

I swear they've been dropping fuckawful rulings every day or two for the past weeks just to exhaust everyone by the time this dropped

They still have eight to go, we haven't even gotten to the one that'll stop the EPA from being able to regulate climate change pollution

jesus tapdancing christ eight to go?

BlackDragon480

Having a sister and niece that had nearly fatal ectopic pregnancies, fuck those 6 assholes with a rusty lawn tool. May they face an eternity in Judecca/9th circle of hell, most likely just between Ugolino and Reggeri and the beast eternally feasting on Judas, Brutus, and Cassius.

Polaritie

BahamutZERO wrote: »

Brainleech wrote: »

I am just disappointed and dismayed
As how does voting fix this? Why can you not flush the court? By flush i mean remove and replace.

Because the only way to legitimately remove federal supreme court judges is impeachment, which requires a majority vote in the house to bring charges and a two-thirds vote in the senate to convict, and ha ha yeah no.

Strictly speaking there's other ways you can make an end run around them, but they all still require a majority in the Senate willing to throw out the fucking filibuster.

Unfortunately, we're stuck with a two party system consisting of a conservative party and a fascist party, so there's not much chance of that. I agree that I don't foresee this being fixed easily. There's a fair amount of room for individual states to tell them to fuck off, but on a national level we're not getting anyone with a backbone in power any time soon.

So the only recourse is to make their lives miserable. Protest like crazy. I'm also game for some old fashioned shunning - get some stuff going to just refuse them service anywhere and everywhere. No restaurants, no entertainment, I'd push to cut them off from TV and internet and such if I thought you could convince soulless corporations to do it. Inflict even a fraction of the misery they're trying to inflict on others on them.

Maddoc

Sorry, it's already illegal to inconvenience them in any way

BlackDragon480

The Geek wrote: »

*tweet about sutstantive due process*

Impressive bullshit, they're basically saying out loud they're slowly nullifying the 14th amendment. What's next, try and go pre-Civil War and rule the 13th amendment is unconstitutional.

Sweeney Tom

Anzekay wrote: »

Sweeney Tom wrote: »

Anzekay wrote: »

I swear they've been dropping fuckawful rulings every day or two for the past weeks just to exhaust everyone by the time this dropped

They still have eight to go, we haven't even gotten to the one that'll stop the EPA from being able to regulate climate change pollution

jesus tapdancing christ eight to go?

Seven really, one case is two combined

Biden v Texas

The case concerns whether federal immigration law requires the Biden administration to keep a program in place that returns certain noncitizens to Mexico during their immigration proceedings because the U.S. Department of Homeland Security lacks the capacity to detain all the inadmissible noncitizens it encounters. It also concerns what procedures administrative agencies must follow under the Administrative Procedure Act to change federal policies.

The questions presented:
"1. Whether 8 U.S.C. 1225 requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to continue implementing Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP).
"2. Whether the court of appeals erred by concluding that the Secretary’s new decision terminating MPP had no legal effect."

Concepcion v USA

In 2008, petitioner Carlos Concepcion pleaded guilty to one count of possession of at least five grams of cocaine base, also known as crack cocaine, with intent to distribute and distribution. The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts sentenced Concepcion to 19 years imprisonment, based on the 2008 edition of federal sentencing guidelines. In 2010, Congress passed the Fair Sentencing Act, reducing the sentencing penalties for most federal crimes involving cocaine base. In 2018, Congress passed the First Step Act, making the changes retroactive and authorizing federal courts to resentence offenders based on the new law. Concepcion asked the court to resentence him, based on these statutory changes. The District of Massachusetts denied the request.

The case concerns sentencing requirements and reductions for drug offenses under the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 and the First Step Act.

The questions presented: "Whether, when deciding if it should "impose a reduced sentence" on an individual under Section 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018, 21 U.S.C. § 841 note, a district court must or may consider intervening legal and factual developments."

Ruan v USA (and Kahn v USA)

In both Ruan v. United States and Kahn v. United States, medical doctors are appealing their convictions for unlawful distribution of controlled substances under the U.S. Controlled Substances Act (CSA) after they were found to have prescribed narcotics outside the usual course of professional practice. Both defendant doctors attempted to use a good faith defense to counter the charges against them at trial and, after their convictions, appealed the way in which the trial judges instructed, or failed to instruct, the jury on the defense. On appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, petitioners Ruan and Kahn asked the court to weigh in on the standard and elements required to assert a good faith defense under the CSA.

The issue: The cases concern the good faith defense available to defendants charged under the U.S. Controlled Substances Act.

The question presented: "[W]hether a physician alleged to have prescribed controlled substances outside the usual course of professional practice may be convicted under Section 841(a)(1) without regard to whether, in good faith, he “reasonably believed” or “subjectively intended” that his prescriptions fall within that course of professional practice."

Torres v Texas Dept of Public Safety

The petitioner Le Roy Torres served in the U.S. Army and is a former state trooper in Texas. While deployed, Torres sustained lung damage. Upon his honorable discharge, Torres sought employment with the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) but requested to be placed in a different position other than as a state trooper, as his lung damage precluded him from performing all of his duties. DPS declined the request and offered him a temporary position as a state trooper, stating that if he did not report to duty, his employment would be terminated. Torres resigned. Later, he sued DPS in state court for violating the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) by not accommodating him. DPS moved to dismiss the case, citing sovereign immunity from USERRA lawsuits. The trial court denied the motion. On appeal, the Texas Thirteenth District Court of Appeals granted DPS' motion. Torres appealed the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The issue: The case concerns the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) and sovereign immunity.

The questions presented: Whether U.S. Congress has the authority to authorize lawsuits against nonconsenting states according to its constitutional war powers.

Kennedy v Bremerton School District

High school football coach Joseph Kennedy prayed at midfield following the conclusion of games. The school district told Kennedy this violated school board policy and required him to stop so as not to violate the Constitution's establishment clause. Kennedy stated that he would not comply. The school district attempted to accommodate Kennedy's expressions, but Kennedy declined the offers and prayed on the field again after two more games. Kennedy was placed on administrative leave. Kennedy sued the school in U.S. district court for violating his right to free speech. The court ruled that the school district suspended Kennedy solely to avoid violating the establishment clause. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the judgment

The issue: The case concerns religious expression at a public school and the Constitution's establishment clause.

The questions presented:
"1. Whether a public-school employee who says a brief, quiet prayer by himself while at school and visible to students is engaged in government speech that lacks any First Amendment protection.
"2. Whether, assuming that such religious expression is private and protected by the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses, the Establishment Clause nevertheless compels public schools to prohibit it."

Oklahoma v Castro-Huerta

Victor Manuel Castro-Huerta was convicted of child neglect in Tulsa County District Court in 2015 and was sentenced to 35 years imprisonment. Castro-Huerta's stepdaughter, whom he was convicted of neglecting, is a member of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians. Castro-Huerta is not a member. On appeal, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals vacated his conviction because the crime occurred in Indian country, holding that the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in the case McGirt v. Oklahoma (2020) covers crimes committed by any individual in Indian country. On September 17, 2021, the State of Oklahoma appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to consider whether the state can prosecute this crime and to consider overturning its ruling in McGirt v. Oklahoma (2020).

The case concerns state authority in Indian country and the scope of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in the case McGirt v. Oklahoma (2020).

The questions presented:
"1. Whether a State has authority to prosecute non-Indians who commit crimes against Indians in Indian country.
"2. Whether McGirt v. Oklahoma, 140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020), should be overruled."

and West Virginia v EPA

The case concerns whether the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the authority to delegate broad regulatory power to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) related to greenhouse gas emissions.

The questions presented: "In 42 U.S.C. § 7411(d), an ancillary provision of the Clean Air Act, did Congress constitutionally authorize the Environmental Protection Agency to issue significant rules—including those capable of reshaping the nation’s electricity grids and unilaterally decarbonizing virtually any sector of the economy—without any limits on what the agency can require so long as it considers cost, nonair impacts, and energy requirements?"

Juggernut

I don't understand how we're supposed to fight all this? Just, fucking everything.

2 years of a global pandemic, monster inflation, a looming recession, horrific gun violence, and all the while we have to constantly go out and protest this theocratic fascist bullshit in the streets while barely keeping our heads above water.

And meanwhile Pelosi and the Democrats are shooting off fundraising emails like the useless, spineless, mealymouthed fuckshits they are and always have been. It's like there are no actual allies. The whole board is stacked.

Knight_

West Virginia vs EPA is going to dismantle the regulatory system altogether most likely.

We’re just kinda fucked

DouglasDanger

Juggernut wrote: »

I don't understand how we're supposed to fight all this? Just, fucking everything.

2 years of a global pandemic, monster inflation, a looming recession, horrific gun violence, and all the while we have to constantly go out and protest this theocratic fascist bullshit in the streets while barely keeping our heads above water.

And meanwhile Pelosi and the Democrats are shooting off fundraising emails like the useless, spineless, mealymouthed fuckshits they are and always have been. It's like there are no actual allies. The whole board is stacked.

Yeah just an endless avalanche of terrible things

I'm increasingly thinking electoral politics will not save anyone, but we obviously cannot talk about other actions on the internet

Polaritie

The Democrats got taken over by milquetoast idiots in the backlash of Reagan basically and those same idiots have kept a death grip on the party machinery basically ever since. Meanwhile the Republicans reached the inevitable result of Nixon's deal with the devil inviting all the racists and fascists in.

And well, the Democrats as a whole are entirely unsuited to dealing with that, because their leadership seems incapable of recognizing the gun to their face.

Juggernut

I am just exhausted.

Nobody in government gives a fuck about any of us. Their only goal is to drag us all down into the shit with them.

Beef Avenger

.

Juggernut wrote: »

I don't understand how we're supposed to fight all this? Just, fucking everything.

2 years of a global pandemic, monster inflation, a looming recession, horrific gun violence, and all the while we have to constantly go out and protest this theocratic fascist bullshit in the streets while barely keeping our heads above water.

And meanwhile Pelosi and the Democrats are shooting off fundraising emails like the useless, spineless, mealymouthed fuckshits they are and always have been. It's like there are no actual allies. The whole board is stacked.

Power has worked hard to erase the methodology to fight this from public consciousness. Promoting ineffective and easily controlled methods as the only acceptable ones, and making the alternatives unacceptable taboos unacceptable to even entertain or discuss

Cambiata

For the women in this country who may need it: https://jewishcurrents.org/how-to-give-yourself-an-abortion

Just be very, very careful about leaving a paper trail.

Quetzi

One thing I will say in the electoral politics direction, if you happen to live in a state where such a thing is politically viable, I'd recommend trying to get protections for abortion put on the books on that level at least. Write your local representatives and all that corny stuff.

At least partially because of Roe, most states do not have abortion codified on an individual level - I believe it's just Illinois that does. Getting that in place would be a good thing going forward for a variety of reasons.

It's not going to solve the problem for large swathes of the country, and isn't the end goal, but it's something that would help.

DouglasDanger

Beef Avenger wrote: »

.

Juggernut wrote: »

I don't understand how we're supposed to fight all this? Just, fucking everything.

2 years of a global pandemic, monster inflation, a looming recession, horrific gun violence, and all the while we have to constantly go out and protest this theocratic fascist bullshit in the streets while barely keeping our heads above water.

And meanwhile Pelosi and the Democrats are shooting off fundraising emails like the useless, spineless, mealymouthed fuckshits they are and always have been. It's like there are no actual allies. The whole board is stacked.

Power has worked hard to erase the methodology to fight this from public consciousness. Promoting ineffective and easily controlled methods as the only acceptable ones, and making the alternatives unacceptable taboos unacceptable to even entertain or discuss

Well, and the forums are publicly indexed and the various government agencies monitor the Internet

BlackDragon480

Juggernut wrote: »

I am just exhausted.

Nobody in government gives a fuck about any of us. Their only goal is to drag us all down into the shit with them.

What they really want to do is force us into the shit till we're up to our necks and they can use our heads as a nice human bridge, so they don't get their Italian leather shoes dirty.

Juggernut

Polaritie wrote: »

The Democrats got taken over by milquetoast idiots in the backlash of Reagan basically and those same idiots have kept a death grip on the party machinery basically ever since. Meanwhile the Republicans reached the inevitable result of Nixon's deal with the devil inviting all the racists and fascists in.

And well, the Democrats as a whole are entirely unsuited to dealing with that, because their leadership seems incapable of recognizing the gun to their face.

At this point they absolutely do recognize it.

They just don't give a fuck.

They've got their money, book deals, insider trading or whatever. They're rich and none of this will ever touch them. They'll die fat and happy in their nice houses, surrounded by family thinking that boy they really did make a difference, didn't they?

Fuck them in equal if not greater measure.

Quetzi

Yeah, the gun isn't in their face

They are insulated by wealth and power, even worst case scenarios won't hurt them that much

That's a big part of the problem with representative democracy as it has been developed

Polaritie

Juggernut wrote: »

Polaritie wrote: »

The Democrats got taken over by milquetoast idiots in the backlash of Reagan basically and those same idiots have kept a death grip on the party machinery basically ever since. Meanwhile the Republicans reached the inevitable result of Nixon's deal with the devil inviting all the racists and fascists in.

And well, the Democrats as a whole are entirely unsuited to dealing with that, because their leadership seems incapable of recognizing the gun to their face.

At this point they absolutely do recognize it.

They just don't give a fuck.

They've got their money, book deals, insider trading or whatever. They're rich and none of this will ever touch them. They'll die fat and happy in their nice houses, surrounded by family thinking that boy they really did make a difference, didn't they?

Fuck them in equal if not greater measure.

Given the degree of insanity on the right, I'd argue that they may believe that, but it's absolutely not the case. There's a significant faction in the GOP whose endgame is actually killing them. I mean, they were how close to being killed in the coup attempt again?