Fogbow

Not exactly, he was saying it was "Possible" which is standard republican doublespeak for "Ya we could do something, so vote for us. But we are not going to as losing this wedge issue means we lose votes in the long run."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mcconn ... overturned

"If the leaked opinion became the final opinion, legislative bodies – not only at the state level but at the federal level – certainly could legislate in that area," McConnell said.

"And if this were the final decision, that was the point that it should be resolved one way or another in the legislative process. So yeah, it's possible," he continued.

However, McConnell stressed that he would not seek a filibuster carve out for legislation on "any subject" should the GOP win back the Senate.

...

McConnell also said Republicans have made their position clear on abortion.

"With regard to the abortion issue, I think it's pretty clear where Senate Republicans stand," McConnell said. "And if and when the court makes a final decision, I expect everybody will be more definitive. But I don't think it's much secret where Senate Republicans stand on that issue."

Suranis wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 1:26 pm Not exactly, he was saying it was "Possible" which is standard republican doublespeak for "Ya we could do something, so vote for us. But we are not going to as losing this wedge issue means we lose votes in the long run."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mcconn ... overturned

"If the leaked opinion became the final opinion, legislative bodies – not only at the state level but at the federal level – certainly could legislate in that area," McConnell said.

"And if this were the final decision, that was the point that it should be resolved one way or another in the legislative process. So yeah, it's possible," he continued.

However, McConnell stressed that he would not seek a filibuster carve out for legislation on "any subject" should the GOP win back the Senate.

...

McConnell also said Republicans have made their position clear on abortion.

"With regard to the abortion issue, I think it's pretty clear where Senate Republicans stand," McConnell said. "And if and when the court makes a final decision, I expect everybody will be more definitive. But I don't think it's much secret where Senate Republicans stand on that issue."

Good point. I'm going to put exactly as much faith in that as I put in the Senate during the SCOTUS hearings when they said Roe v. Wade was settled law and we needn't be worried about it being overturned.

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 1:19 pm Bullshit. McConnell has been talking about pushing a federal ban on abortion if Roe v. Wade were overturned for months. He's giddy.

I'll give you that he's probably knee deep in his bourbon Manhattans right now, but for a different reason.

Agreed.

Abortion has always been a pillar of McConnell's political and fundraising power. I think what we will see next is a progression, they just defeated the federal right to abortion, now they can go after the next boss : a federal prohibition. Nothing gets the money rolling in like a major victory and the promise to use it as a springboard to an even bigger one.

Xposting. Listen to them. They aren’t hiding it.

Manu Raju @mkraju wrote: House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy told me he backs legislation to codify a 15-week ban on abortion, saying: "I'd support that."

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 12:50 pm

Kendra wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 11:36 am

Manchin: “I am deeply disappointed that the Supreme Court has voted to overturn Roe v. Wade. … I trusted Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh when they testified under oath that they also believed Roe v. Wade was settled legal precedent and I am alarmed they chose to reject” it

Jesse Rodriguez @JesseRodriguez wrote: Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME): “This decision is inconsistent with what Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh said in their testimony and their meetings with me, where they both were insistent on the importance of supporting long-standing precedents that the country has relied upon.”

She's a piece of shit. I try not wish ill upon people, but she is a personal exemption for me.

Too, also, these 'apologies' are useless on top of being meaningless -- the people who will vote for them will vote for them regardless and don't care since it's a feature to them, not a bug; the people who won't vote for them won't vote for them regardless and *knew already that they were being insincere*.

On the one hand, it is chilling that Thomas is openly stating that they will reconsider contraception bans, same-sex relations, and same-sex marriages. On the other hand, it's kinda nice that he is openly stating it, because it makes it blindingly simple to shut down the morons with their blinders on that still claim it could never happen.

Lying liars that lie.

I heard about this first at 10:22 AM by text from a good friend. Her daughter-in-law would be dead now, leaving a medically disabled three-year-child without her mother, had she not had an abortion three years ago.

Phone and watch notifications came in seconds later.

The Onion:

Biden explicitly calls out Justice Thomas by name. Because, fuck that dude.

Breaking911 @Breaking911 wrote: BIDEN: "[Justice Thomas] explicitly called to reconsider the right of marriage equality, the right of couples to make their choices on contraception. This is an extreme and dangerous path the court is now taking us on."

When do they get to interracial marriage?

AndyinPA wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:03 pm When do they get to interracial marriage?

Strangely enough, Loving v. Virginia wasn't on Thomas' list of decision to look at overturning, although it certainly fits with the three others he specifically mentioned.

Odd that.

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:06 pm

AndyinPA wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:03 pm When do they get to interracial marriage?

Strangely enough, Loving v. Virginia wasn't on Thomas' list of decision to look at overturning, although it certainly fits with the three others he specifically mentioned.

Odd that.

Isn't it?

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:06 pm

AndyinPA wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:03 pm When do they get to interracial marriage?

Strangely enough, Loving v. Virginia wasn't on Thomas' list of decision to look at overturning, although it certainly fits with the three others he specifically mentioned.

Odd that.

Or Pierce v. Society of Sisters, the right to choose a private education for your children.

HONOLULU — On a dizzying day for people on both sides of America’s gun-control debate, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a New York state law that required residents to provide justification for carrying a concealed handgun, a ruling that could have profound impact in Hawaii, home to some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country.

https://spectrumlocalnews.com/hi/hawaii ... -carry-law

We're proud of that. Since I've lived here (1980's), there was only one mass murder - Xerox worker killed 7 coworkers in 1999. All of Hawaii mourned. Gun crimes are very rare. Well, up to now, thanks to SCOTUS. NRA has harassed us for years, and probably is very happy tonight.

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 6:39 pm Biden explicitly calls out Justice Thomas by name. Because, fuck that dude.

Breaking911 @Breaking911 wrote: BIDEN: "[Justice Thomas] explicitly called to reconsider the right of marriage equality, the right of couples to make their choices on contraception. This is an extreme and dangerous path the court is now taking us on."

So, it is now fashionable for Supreme Court justices to ask for cases to hear so they can repeal the old and replace with the new? I always thought these individuals were just in the background taking up a handful of cases each year, conducting hearings, and issuing opinions. This statement sounds to me like Thomas and his elk want to legislate from the bench.

This court is rewriting the Constitution by eliminating the separation of powers principle and vesting everything in the judicial branch.

And, speaking of Thomas, for twenty-five years he acted like the right-field foul line umpire in the World Series, only called upon once in a great while to determine whether a fly ball down the line is fair or foul, whether a fly was caught or trapped, or if there were fan interference on a ball in play.

Now it seems like this guy is calling balls and strikes in every game. And he is calling them like Angel Hernandez. Hernandez had a 9% error rate on calling balls and strikes in 2021.

https://www.sportscasting.com/how-angel ... b-history/

Isn't it usually the Republicans that are insisting that activist judges are foul play?

RTH10260 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 25, 2022 3:08 pm Isn't it usually the Republicans that are insisting that activist judges are foul play?

The line I’m hearing in conservative media is that this is the opposite of judicial activism, it is rather the undoing of the damage done by activist judges in recent decades. FWIW.

Seen on Facebook:

Clarence Thomas
Samuel Alito
Neil Gorsuch
Brett Kavanaugh
Amy Coney Barrett
(and I would add John Roberts, just for the hell of it)

May they never enjoy a nice meal in a restaurant again.

AndyinPA wrote: ↑Sat Jun 25, 2022 6:28 pm Seen on Facebook:

Clarence Thomas
Samuel Alito
Neil Gorsuch
Brett Kavanaugh
Amy Coney Barrett
(and I would add John Roberts, just for the hell of it)

May they never enjoy a nice meal in a restaurant again.

Could they rely on their restaurant food being spit-free?

Thursday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning New York's concealed weapon law will likely change things in Hawaii, too, where it's now highly unusual to see people carrying loaded weapons in public.

Some say the change will lead to more gun violence in a state that traditionally sees very little. In 2020, Hawaii had the nation's lowest rate for gun deaths, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Lots of discussion here in Hawaii. Things are going to change, and not for the better. Hell, we often forget to lock our doors. This ruling is going to change my state in the wrong direction. We weren't worried about being shot in a grocery store, and children weren't scared to go to school.

Lots of conservative media taking a victory lap on the pray-to-play case. Sucks. School districts will need to be VERY careful with who they chose to hire in the future. Imo.

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:13 pm Lots of conservative media taking a victory lap on the pray-to-play case. Sucks. School districts will need to be VERY careful with who they chose to hire in the future. Imo.

I can remember when I was growing up schools had been informed that they could not prohibit LGBT or 'satanic' after school groups under the idea that if they allowed some they have to allow all. So schools started shutting down in school prayer groups and blaming it on the 'the gays'. Maybe schools need to start doing that with sports... 'sorry, there is no more sportsball at this school, thank your local church'