Supreme Court to take up case next term that could limit Roe v. Wade (CNN)

[ItsjustMe]

The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to take up a major abortion case next term concerning a controversial Mississippi law that banned most abortions after 15 weeks, rekindling a potentially major challenge to Roe v. Wade at the majority conservative court.

[Walleye]

1. Well I'm way past my child bearing years. I feel sorry for the younger women

But I have no sympathy for the women who vote for Republicans or are too apathetic to vote at all. I think this Supreme Court is going to show that we’ve been right all along about these religious fanatics. It will be interesting to see them try to enforce an anti-abortion law in this day and age

[jimfields33]

2. I'm surprised they took this case

They didn’t take Texas which was even worse. I know they are all bad. I’m thinking it might be 5-4 on our side. I just don’t think Robert’s is ready to pull the “hell to come” (70 percent of the country will be pissed) from an abortion law quite yet. Gorchuck and beer guy may vote with Robert’s.

[katmondoo]

3. The Republicans will lose a lot of money if the Supreme court ends abortion rights

They campaign on this even if they support abortion when their mistress's get pregnant.

[PTWB]

4. Nonsense.

The fundraising messaging will simply change.

“Donate or they’ll bring abortion back.”

[markpkessinger]

5. I am beginning to think . . .

. . . that we need a constitutional amendment that reads, "Rights extended under this Constitution, whether originally understood to have been included in the text of this document, as amended, or later deemed to have been extended by a decision of the United States Supreme Court, shall not be subject to rescission, limitation or restriction by subsequent Supreme Court decision, but shall be subject to rescission, limitation or restriction solely by amendment to this Constitution."

Why do I think this is necessary? Because it messes with people's lives to say, under one Supreme Court majority, that citizens have a particular right, and under another Supreme Court majority, that they don't. One thing I worry about, besides the effort to ban abortion, is the gay marriage decision, now that Anthony Kennedy is no longer on the Court. I wouldn't put it past this court to take a case challenging the gay marriage ruling, and the conservative majority to reverse it. And what would that do to the millions of LGBTQ+ couples who have already been married? When it comes to Constitutional rights, there simply must be some kind of reliable stability.

If we are true to our founding documents, we have no business restricting or rescinding rights, but only extending them. Something as fundamental as a Constitutional right should not be subject to the vicissitudes of changing Supreme Court majorities!