- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Potato-head said he supports changing filibuster for abortions
Posted on 6/30/22 at 8:37 am
Posted on 6/30/22 at 8:37 am
9
Posted on 6/30/22 at 8:38 am to fatboydave
Do it
Make Congress vote yes or no on this for all to see
Make Congress vote yes or no on this for all to see
Posted on 6/30/22 at 8:39 am to fatboydave
I don’t see how any such law could stand, The Court has ruled there is not constitutional right for an abortion. That it is a state issue. Seems many states would challenge any federal law.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 8:41 am to fatboydave
quote:
Biden supports changing filibuster rules to codify Roe v. Wade , but only for this - we promise. And when you are in power, the filibuster must be protected as a norm.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 8:41 am to fatboydave
We all knew that was coming. They can also add DC and PR as states and guarantee a permanent majority in the Senate.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 8:42 am to fatboydave
Just another Dingy Harry move that the Dims are going to come to regret.
When the Republicans get back in charge, they will then be able to eliminate abortions nationwide.
With the way it stands, at least the Dims will have abortion legal in about half the states.
When the Republicans get back in charge, they will then be able to eliminate abortions nationwide.
With the way it stands, at least the Dims will have abortion legal in about half the states.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 8:44 am to SingleMalt1973
quote:
The Court has ruled there is not constitutional right for an abortion. That it is a state issue.
Read the Kavanaugh concurrent opinion. One of the problems I had was Kavanaugh's concurrent is that he continually referred to the ability to change abortion laws belonging to the states "and Congress".
Posted on 6/30/22 at 8:50 am to SingleMalt1973
quote:
I don’t see how any such law could stand, The Court has ruled there is not constitutional right for an abortion. That it is a state issue. Seems many states would challenge any federal
From what I know about Kavanaugh, is he is very pro-congress. And will let Congress do whatever they want, he just doesn't like the courts or executive over reaching.
This goes back to the commerce clause, starting with the courts interpretations of Congress's role during FDR and LBJ. The courts gave Congress alot of leeway which they really didn't have. Kavanagh unfortunately seems to be OK with this, which means he would allow this if Congress passed it.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 8:52 am to fatboydave
Would it not be more economical to mail each adult Citizen a voucher for a year's supply of birth control pills or condoms ? And then drop this shitty subject of abortion 'rights' .
Posted on 6/30/22 at 8:52 am to FlyingTiger1955
quote:
We all knew that was coming. They can also add DC and PR as states and guarantee a permanent majority in the Senate.
Yep, that is their real play. Biden can say he only wants to change it for abortions, but once they kill the filibuster in this way, it is dead for everything. Plus they have been trying to kill the filibuster ever since he got in office, long before this abortion ruling.
Luckily Manchin and Simena have stood in their way. But if they end up adding two more dem seats to the Senate to counter Manchin and Simena, then be prepared for them to vote in everything from DC & PR statehood, to voting "reform". Abortion will be the least of our concerns.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 9:01 am to Bamatab
quote:
Yep, that is their real play. Biden can say he only wants to change it for abortions, but once they kill the filibuster in this way, it is dead for everything. Plus they have been trying to kill the filibuster ever since he got in office, long before this abortion ruling.
I'm to the point, where I actually hope they start doing things like this. End filibuster, pack courts, add states, you name it.
That is probably why they won't do it. They can already get everything they want within the system as is designed and their sweet setup with corporate and foreign oligarchs. In the mean time, they will use this other stuff as wedge issues.
The last thing they want to do is for a real resistance to form from the right. They will figure out a way to placate our side just enough to keep us tamped down and neutered. Which is why they will give us a weak Kevin McCarthy led house in November that won't do anything.
This post was edited on 6/30/22 at 9:06 am
Posted on 6/30/22 at 9:18 am to Rocco Lampone
Imagine being this childish...you lose on an issue. Want to overturn it the wrong way and say but only for this...meaning when conservatives get in power they can't do it.
If you are liberal and agree with that thought...you are the problem with this country.
If you are liberal and agree with that thought...you are the problem with this country.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 9:35 am to SingleMalt1973
quote:No offense, but you clearly do not understand the ruling in Dobbs.
I don’t see how any such law could stand, The Court has ruled there is not constitutional right for an abortion. That it is a state issue. Seems many states would challenge any federal law.
SCOTUS ruled that there is no CONSTITUTIONALLY protected right to abortion. It decidedly DID NOT rule that Congress is prohibited from legislating in this area. These are two distinct (and barely related) questions. Given the current state of the law re the breadth of Congressional power, Congress clearly CAN act.
Personally, I see it as one of the 100,000 topics in which Congress should just stay the Hell of of the States’ business, but that is a matter of ideology/policy … not a matter of Constitutional interpretation.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 9:35 am to fatboydave
Why would they do this when they're about to lose the House & Senate in 4 months?
Posted on 6/30/22 at 9:37 am to fatboydave
quote:
Potato-head said he supports changing filibuster
they always do when it supports their side...can thank Harry reid
Posted on 6/30/22 at 9:39 am to fatboydave
They want no filibuster for leftist issues. Filibuster for anything the right wants. And they call republicans "threat to democracy"?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News