Or, more accurately
Mississippi DOH vs Jackson Woman's Health Organization, et al.

Below are a few excerpts from the leaked decision.

We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision - including the one on which the defenders of
Roe and Casey now chiefly rely: the Due Process Clause of the 14th
Amendment. That provision has been held to guarantee some rights that
are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such right must be
�deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition� and �implicit in
the concept of ordered liberty.� The right to abortion docs not fall
within this category.

Until the latter part of the 20th century, such a right was entirely
unknown in American law. Indeed, when the 14th Amendment was adopted,
three quarters of the States made abortion a crime - at all stages of pregnancy. The abortion right is also critically different from any
other right that this Court has held to fall within the 14th Amendment's protection of 'liberty.' Roe's defenders characterize the abortion right
as similar to the rights recognized in past decisions involving matters
such as intimate sexual relations, contraception, and marriage, but
abortion is fundamentally different, as both Roe and Casey acknowledged, because it destroys what those decisions called 'fetal life' and what
the law now before us describes as an 'unborn human being'.

Stare decisis, the doctrine on which Casey's controlling opinion was
based, does not compel unending adherence to Roe's abuse of judicial
authority. Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And
far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe
and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division. It is time to heed
the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people's
elected representatives.

Conclusion

We end this opinion where we began. Abortion presents a profound moral question. The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State
from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to
the people and their elected representatives.�The judgment of the Fifth
Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is ordered
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There it is - "Roe was egregiously wrong from the start." "The
Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from
regulating or prohibiting abortion." "We now overrule those decisions
and return that authority to the people and their elected
representatives."

Oklahoma has just passed a "Heartbeat" law and has a "Trigger" law in
place just waiting to ban nearly all abortions as soon as the SCOTUS
returns the question of abortion to the States - where it belongs.

Let's go Brandon!!!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, May 4, 2022 at 7:25:48 PM UTC-4, Jerry wrote:

Or, more accurately
Mississippi DOH vs Jackson Woman's Health Organization, et al.

Below are a few excerpts from the leaked decision.

We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision - including the one on which the defenders of
Roe and Casey now chiefly rely: the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. That provision has been held to guarantee some rights that
are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such right must be
“deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition” and “implicit in
the concept of ordered liberty.” The right to abortion docs not fall within this category.

Until the latter part of the 20th century, such a right was entirely
unknown in American law. Indeed, when the 14th Amendment was adopted,
three quarters of the States made abortion a crime - at all stages of pregnancy. The abortion right is also critically different from any
other right that this Court has held to fall within the 14th Amendment's protection of 'liberty.' Roe's defenders characterize the abortion right
as similar to the rights recognized in past decisions involving matters
such as intimate sexual relations, contraception, and marriage, but
abortion is fundamentally different, as both Roe and Casey acknowledged, because it destroys what those decisions called 'fetal life' and what
the law now before us describes as an 'unborn human being'.

Stare decisis, the doctrine on which Casey's controlling opinion was
based, does not compel unending adherence to Roe's abuse of judicial authority. Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And
far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe
and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division. It is time to heed
the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people's
elected representatives.

Conclusion

We end this opinion where we began. Abortion presents a profound moral question. The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State
from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to
the people and their elected representatives.‘The judgment of the Fifth Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is ordered
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There it is - "Roe was egregiously wrong from the start." "The
Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from
regulating or prohibiting abortion." "We now overrule those decisions
and return that authority to the people and their elected
representatives."

Oklahoma has just passed a "Heartbeat" law and has a "Trigger" law in
place just waiting to ban nearly all abortions as soon as the SCOTUS
returns the question of abortion to the States - where it belongs.

Let's go Brandon!!!

If they can tell women what to do to their bodies, can we tell men that are more than 6 months behind on child support to get a vasectomy?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/4/2022 4:25 PM, "Jerry Osage"@osage.com wrote:

Or, more accurately
Mississippi DOH vs Jackson Woman's Health Organization, et al.

Below are a few excerpts from the leaked decision.

We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision - including the one on which the defenders of
Roe and Casey now chiefly rely: the Due Process Clause of the 14th
Amendment. That provision has been held to guarantee some rights that
are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such right must be
“deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” The right to abortion docs not fall
within this category.

Until the latter part of the 20th century, such a right was entirely
unknown in American law. Indeed, when the 14th Amendment was adopted,
three quarters of the States made abortion a crime - at all stages of pregnancy.

[snip]

Wow, that's an incredible amount of pure bullshit.

"Want a quick break to read a 114 year old story that literally would
not exist if Alito’s draft were right about the history of abortion law?

It’s a tale of scandal, intrigue, and *most of all* what ppl actually understood about the rt to abortion in early America. Thread:
In 1908, Oregon prosecutors charged an electrotherapist named J.D. Dunn
w/ sexually abusing a 14-year-old patient. At trial, Dunn’s defense
turned on a single witness, a certain Mrs. Kruse who said she was in the
office during the alleged abuse and that it never happened. 2/13"

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1522314696275075073.html

Nobody considered it an abortion unless it happened after
"quickening".

TB

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)