@Mott-The-Hoople saidPresidents can still influence laws, using their power to veto those they don't like or create executive orders. In Trump's case, his power to appoint SCOTUS Justices directly lead to abortion protections being overturned.
neither Trump nor harris can make law…she is using this on the gullible fools to make them think she can do something…such as shathouse
53d
@Mott-The-Hoople saidWell, if the Democrats ever get control of the WH and Congress then could jettison the filibuster and put say 10 new justices on the SCOTUS who will recognize a women's right to bodily sovereignty.
democrats are making a big issue on abortion.
What do you think harris can do to bring uncontrolled abortion back?
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147606
@vivify saidEOs arent law and can be overturned
Presidents can still influence laws, using their power to veto those they don't like or create executive orders. In Trump's case, his power to appoint SCOTUS Justices directly lead to abortion protections being overturned.
are you thinking the scotus ruled unlawfully when reverting abortion back to the states?
BTW scotus didnt ban abortion as you libs want to pretend
53d
@no1marauder
Works for me. But the cadre of people pushing for project 2025 will not go away no matter how many SCOTUS members we slip in.
It took a concerted 50 year long relentless effort to kill Roe V Wade, they were working in more or less secret for all that time which shows they are in it for the long haul and it seems no matter how many decades go by they will still be there trying to destroy democracy.
I guess it happens at times to ALL democracies and they win or lose based on the reply to their anti democracy wars.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidIt doesn't matter that EOs aren't laws, they still must be followed until they're overturned.
EOs arent law and can be overturned
are you thinking the scotus ruled unlawfully when reverting abortion back to the states?
BTW scotus didnt ban abortion as you libs want to pretend
Did they rule unlawfully? All 3 of Trump's Justices said Roe was "established precedent".
https://www.wral.com/story/fact-check-did-trump-supreme-court-picks-agree-roe-v-wade-is-established-precedent/20267629/
The words of Brett Kavanaugh:
Roe "is settled as a precedent of the Supreme Court, entitled the respect under principles of stare decisis. And one of the important things to keep in mind about Roe v. Wade is that it has been reaffirmed many times over the past 45 years"
By their own words, overturning Roe should not have been done.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147606
@no1marauder saidand then when republicans get control of the WH and Congress they could appoint 150 justices…this has bit dems in the ass before (harry reid)
Well, if the Democrats ever get control of the WH and Congress then could jettison the filibuster and put say 10 new justices on the SCOTUS who will recognize a women's right to bodily sovereignty.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147606
53d
@vivify said“Did they rule unlawfully? All 3 of Trump's Justices said Roe was "established precedent".
It doesn't matter that EOs aren't laws, they still must be followed until they're overturned.
Did they rule unlawfully? All 3 of Trump's Justices said Roe was "established precedent".
https://www.wral.com/story/fact-check-did-trump-supreme-court-picks-agree-roe-v-wade-is-established-precedent/20267629/
The words of Brett Kavanaugh:
Roe "is settled as a pr ...[text shortened]... times over the past 45 years
By their own words, overturning Roe should not have been done.
the question was; did scotus rule unlawfully?
53d
@Mott-The-Hoople saidSure, tell the American People, a solid majority of whom support a women's right to reproductive freedom and bodily sovereignty, that you want control of the political branches so you can restrict those rights.
and then when republicans get control of the WH and Congress they could appoint 150 justices…this has bit dems in the ass before (harry reid)
53d
@Mott-The-Hoople saidThey ruled incorrectly. And that ruling will eventually be reversed by a Court that takes seriously the protection of rights.
“Did they rule unlawfully? All 3 of Trump's Justices said Roe was "established precedent".
the question was; did scotus rule unlawfully?
@Mott-The-Hoople saidAccording to the words of Trump's own justices about "established precedent", the ruling wasn't a correct ruling.
“Did they rule unlawfully? All 3 of Trump's Justices said Roe was "established precedent".
the question was; did scotus rule unlawfully?
53d
@Mott-The-Hoople saidNo, they did not.
“2. Just change the law. Effectively putting the high court’s verdict in the bin of insanity.”
so you agree the scotus decision was correct? they ruled according to the law
They ignored 50 years of legal precedent.
53d
@no1marauder saidSo now they know what a woman is??? Right.
Well, if the Democrats ever get control of the WH and Congress then could jettison the filibuster and put say 10 new justices on the SCOTUS who will recognize a women's right to bodily sovereignty.
