Mark Joseph Stern @mjs_DC : Justice Sotomayor dissents from the Supreme Court's refusal

[BeckyDem]

Link to tweet

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. "Hold my nose" anybody?

[Hugh_Lebowski]

2. I understand your campaign ER but seriously there's almost nobody on DU that wouldn't have crawled

over broken glass to vote for Hillary in 2016, so ... you're kinda shouting into the wind here

[moondust]

3. And she is correct.

A law well established for 50 years is the default norm that should remain in place until something that warrants changing that norm is decided upon.

[BeckyDem]

4. Spot on.

[moondust]

5. What about guns?

Would they suspend the 2nd Amendment while they hear 5000 state and local challenges?

Of course not.

[BeckyDem]

6. So true.

Those on the right saw the opportunity and went for it. Not a good sign.

[SergeStorms]

7. They had to.

If they didn't do it now, after McConnell stole two SC appointments, their "christian" voting bloc would revolt. They believe they're home free now, on their way to having Roe v. Wade overturned.

I'd like to think the SC would uphold a law that's been on the books for almost 50 years. I'd like to think that, but I don't.

The reich-wing crazies are on course to turn the United States into a christo-fascist hell hole, and if voting rights aren't protected, they may very well achieve their nefarious goals.

[BeckyDem]

17. Yep. They make me anxious too.

[ShazzieB]

8. This caught my eye.

From Sotomayor's dissent:

The Court is right to calendar this application for argument and to grant certiorari before judgment in both this case and Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson, No. 21–463, in recognition of the public importance of the issues these cases raise. The promise of future adjudication offers cold comfort, however, for Texas women seeking abortion care, who are entitled to relief now. These women will suffer personal harm from delaying their medical care, and as their pregnancies progress, they may even be unable to obtain abortion care altogether. Because every day the Court fails to grant relief is devastating, both for individual women
and for our constitutional system as a whole, I dissent from the Court’s refusal to stay administratively the Fifth Circuit’s order.

It's quite clear to me that Thomas, Coney Barrett, and the other conservajustices are not the least bit concerned about women suffering personal harm from the denial of their constitutional rights. Like other forced birthers, they regard the rights, needs, and suffering of real live women as purely secondary to the aim of safeguarding the (nonexistent) rights of embryos and fetuses. To them, women who seek abortions are evil jezebels who deserve to be punished, and causing such women to suffer is a feature, not a bug, of refusing to stay the Texas law.

I hope to hell the conservatives don't end up inventing some excuse to overturn Roe v. Wade, but if they do, I am sure the reaction will shock them. The outrage that will result is a kraken they will greatly regret releasing.

[wnylib]

9. It looks pretty clear from this SC position

that they intend to overturn Roe v Wade.

[bucolic_frolic]

10. If we could just get the right to sue every maskless infector for COVID infections @$10K a pop

But they don't want to restrict that freedom

[Skittles]

11. she gets it

[LetMyPeopleVote]

12. Great dissent

Link to tweet

[BigmanPigman]

13. But the SCOTUS says it is not partisan...

They should rename it the BS-COTUS since they are so full of BS. Partisan 100%

Time to balance the court, in fact WAY past time to balance it.

[Polybius]

14. What was the vote?

I didn't see anything about it.

[former9thward]

15. This was an order not a decision.

They don't release votes on orders.

[UTUSN]

16. K&R