Eyes on Roberts, Kavanaugh and Barrett as SCOTUS considers Texas' abortion ban

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Since the challenge to a Texas abortion ban first reached the Supreme Court two months ago, the justices have conferred only in private over the law that flouts nearly a half century of abortion-rights rulings.

On Monday the internal debate goes public, as the nine hold oral arguments and air concerns about the ban's constitutionality or, alternatively, why they believe it is sound. Twice, the majority has rejected pleas to suspend the abortion ban.

In this round, the justices are not directly revisiting the constitutional right to abortion, established in 1973, but rather addressing the authority of judges to vindicate rights.

The paired lawsuits, brought by Texas abortion clinics and the US Department of Justice, come to the high court at a time when it has been flexing its new conservative muscle, with three appointees of former President Donald Trump.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/eyes-on-roberts-kavanaugh-and-barrett-as-scotus-considers-texas-abortion-ban/ar-AAQ9u2d?li=BBnb7Kz

[JohnSJ]

1. Robert's will join the 3 Democratic appointed judges to save Roe, but the vote will be 5-4 to keep

the Texas law

[LiberatedUSA]

2. If that happens...

…then blue states will respond by effectively outlawing gun ownership for anyone not a cop by doing the same law; and that will be when everyone starts googling Rome.

[JohnSJ]

3. I hope I am wrong. There are so many things wrong with that law, but the fact that they did not

allow an injunction to pause the law from taking effect until a decision was made does not bode very well

[KentuckyWoman]

4. You have more faith in Roberts than I do.

Otherwise I see it your way and hope we are both wrong.