Charles Pierce on Griswold:

[tblue37]

Charles P. Pierce
@CharlesPPierce
Can folks please stop referring to the Griswold decision as having been "about contraception." Griswold confirmed the existence of a right to privacy within the Constitution. That's everything. /1

@CharlesPPierce
Replying to
@CharlesPPierce
It's about marriage. It's about sex. It's about what we read. It's about how we communicate with each other. It's about the limits to search and seizure. It's about medical records and genetic information. It's about libraries and the internet. /2

Charles P. Pierce
@CharlesPPierce
"...as the Ninth Amendment expressly recognizes, there are fundamental personal rights such as this one, which are protected from abridgment by the Government though not specifically mentioned in the Constitution."
-- Justice Arthur Goldberg, Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965. /3

Charles P. Pierce
@CharlesPPierce
"I am sure that the rights of conscience, in particular, if submitted to public definition would be narrowed much more than they are likely to be by an assumed power."
-- James Madison to Thomas Jefferson, 1788. /fin

[SunSeeker]

1. K & R

[bronxiteforever]

2. Kick & recommend. So well written per usual from Mr. Pierce.

[ancianita]

3. To strike down Griswold is to strike down the Fourteenth Amendment.

[Nasruddin]

5. They've always been after the 14th

Right-wing radio & lit in the '60's & '70's were always talking about the illegal or illegitimate 14th (because of the way ratification took place).

I'm sure they'll go after it if they can - fits the agenda.

[Claire Oh Nette]

8. They'll go after the 14th to end birthright citizenship

and get rid of that pesky insurrectionist clause.

[Solly Mack]

4. K&R

[UTUSN]

6. K&R

[Grins]

7. So stop the sure-to-fail-again the "codify a right to an abortion"

Yes!!!!

Said this for years. PRIVACY!!!

So skip trying to “codifying a right to an abortion.” Make it a law that all Americans have a right to PRIVACY in all aspects of their lives.

Imagine the arguments from the Reich-wing trying to block it!

N.B. Yes, I am aware it may take a constitutional amendment, but damn it - get on it!

[intrepidity]

9. Whst is stopping them?

This should be done tomorrow. Why not?

[LetMyPeopleVote]

10. The right to privacy is under attack

This is the asshole who drafted the Texas abortion law. This asshole wants to strike down the implied right of privacy by getting Roe overruled which would/could lead to striking down the right to same sex marriage. interracial marriage, gay sex and other rights

There is a pattern here. These assholes want to get rid of Griswold and undo the right of privacy. That would cause Lawrence v. Texas (consensual same sex intercourse), Cooling v. Virginia (inter-racial marriage), birth control and same sex marriage to be overturned.

Link to tweet

https://www.comicsands.com/jonathan-mitchell-overturn-gay-marriage-2655065691.html

Though Mitchell's brief, also signed by his co-counsel Adam Mortara, dedicates much of its time to the Texas abortion law's defense, it also questions "lawless" pieces of legislation, namely the Lawrence v. Texas ruling, which decriminalized gay sex nationwide, and the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling, which legalized same-sex marriage.

Though the brief does not say reversing Roe v. Wade would threaten the same-sex marriage ruling, it does say that

""the news is not as good for those who hope to preserve the court-invented rights to homosexual behavior and same-sex marriage …
"These 'rights,' like the right to abortion from Roe, are judicial concoctions, and there is no other source of law that can be invoked to salvage their existence."

It goes on to add that while the Supreme Court should not necessarily overturn Lawrence and Obergefell, it should consider these two rulings as "lawless" as Roe v. Wade and, by extension, Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

"This is not to say that the Court should announce the overruling of Lawrence and Obergefell if it decides to overrule Roe and Casey in this case."
"But neither should the Court hesitate to write an opinion that leaves those decisions hanging by a thread. Lawrence and Obergefell, while far less hazardous to human life, are as lawless as Roe."

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet