• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding metals, finance, politics, government and many other topics"

Roe v. Wade to be Overturned by SCOTUS!

Casey Jones

Train left the station...
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 4, 2020
Messages
10,715
Reaction score
17,246
Location
Down the road from the Kaczynski ranch
I fully understand this and I am by no means "pro-abortion". Abortions are horrible and the process is inhumane...to the baby.

However there are circumstances where they can be necessary. Charging an 11 year old with a homicide felony because she terminated an early unwanted forced pregnancy is not acceptable. Like I said, imagine if she was YOUR daughter. It might make you feel differently.

I know this is not the norm, rather an outlier - as the decision to have an abortion should be itself - something that lies beyond the norm in a particular set of unusual circumstance

As for Roe v Wade being overturned, I support it. I think this is something that should be left to the States per the 10th amendment.
This is the proper prerogative of the States.

STATES are to set criminal law. If your state wants to legalize abortion...so be it.

If others do not, that, also, is within their bailiwick.

I don't like to play the "Yeah-But-What-If" game. What you wind up with is a mess of a criminal code and in the end, it's decided on one person's caprices, and that person is not you. It opens the door to judicial tyranny.
 

Goldhedge

Retired
Sr Midas Sup +++
Survivor
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
70,719
Reaction score
156,098
Location
Rocky Mountains

SCOTUS Turning Up the Heat in Probe of Roe Draft Opinion Leak: Report​

Gary Ray
by Gary Ray
May 31, 2022

SCOTUS Turning Up the Heat in Probe of Roe Draft Opinion Leak: Report

On May 2, Politico published a leaked preliminary Supreme Court “opinion” which indicated the Court’s intent to overturn the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade decision. Daily Wire reports the leak has thrown the Court into turmoil and efforts to discover the culprit are intensifying.

Reportedly, the investigation into the leak, ordered by Chief Justice John Roberts, has forced law clerks working for SCOTUS justices to consider retaining legal counsel.

CNN reports that the intensified investigation now includes requests for law clerks’ cell phone records and signed affidavits.

The outlet noted that “Chief Justice John Roberts met with law clerks as a group after the breach, but it is not known whether any systematic individual interviews have occurred.”

Josh Blackman noted in a post in Reason that clerks likely have freedom under the law to disclose certain information (under certain circumstances).

“I think an attorney, in the course of representation, could decide to speak to the press to promote his client’s interests. But there is an open question: does the attorney-client privilege survive in light of a duty of confidentiality to the Court?”​

Blackman clarified: “That is, could a clerk tell her attorney about some internal information in order to prepare a legal strategy? Could the Chief fire a clerk who confides in this lawyer?”

Justice Roberts appointed Supreme Court Marshal Colonel Gail Curley to lead the investigation regarding the leak.

An AP News report noted that Curley “in some ways [was] constrained in her investigation by her position, which was created just after the Civil War, in 1867.”

The AP report clarified: “Experts say leaking the draft opinion likely wasn’t a crime, and Curley’s investigative tools are limited. She could theoretically hire an outside law firm to assist, and in other judicial records cases the FBI has been called in. But it isn’t clear if she or others have the power to issue subpoenas to get material from journalists or the fewer than 100 people in the court — including justices — with access to a draft opinion.”

In early May, Chief Justice Roberts stated that the leak was “a singular and egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the Court.”

In the draft opinion, Justice Samuel Alito wrote bluntly:

We hold that Roe and Casey (Planned Parenthood v. Casey) must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey chiefly rely — the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. …

…It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.

Democrat leaders have assailed the preliminary opinion, encouraged demonstrations, and, many believe, prompted waves of violence across the country.

Many experts expect SCOTUS to rule on the matter within weeks.

 

Uglytruth

Super Moderator
Sr Midas Sup +++
Survivor
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
21,717
Reaction score
53,413

SongSungAU

Mother Lode Found
Sr Site Supporter
Mother Lode
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
13,953
Reaction score
30,851

oldgaranddad

Platinum Bling
Sr Midas Sup +++
Platinum Bling
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
7,054
Reaction score
15,605
Location
On the top shelf.
The AP report clarified: “Experts say leaking the draft opinion likely wasn’t a crime, and Curley’s investigative tools are limited.
Whomever wrote that is clearly ignorant, stupid or downright deceitful. Courts are their own little fiefdom's and the judge can do nearly anything they want in them. That includes the chambers and the offices that the clerks work in. It is all considered "the court". The leaker would be charged with contempt of court along with trying disrupt the proceedings of the court. There are probably a half dozen other more obscure charges that could be lodged at the perpetrator too.

With the FBI demanding the clerks cell phone data but not the cell phone data of the justices only reinforces my opinion that one of the justices leaked the decision and some poor clerk is going to be the scapegoat.
 

D-FENZ

Platinum Bling
Sr Midas Sup +++
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
4,011
Reaction score
10,966
Other than the obvious advantage one would have knowing a verdict ahead of the herd so to speak- e.g. a wager at Las Vegas or whatever. Who is or was harmed by the leak now that it is common knowledge? Would the leak change the court's final decision?

Serious question.
 

oldgaranddad

Platinum Bling
Sr Midas Sup +++
Platinum Bling
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
7,054
Reaction score
15,605
Location
On the top shelf.
Other than the obvious advantage one would have knowing a verdict ahead of the herd so to speak- e.g. a wager at Las Vegas or whatever. Who is or was harmed by the leak now that it is common knowledge? Would the leak change the court's final decision?

Serious question.
Leaking the decision was intended to shame or cause fear in the justices so as change their votes. It's called coercion.
 

Fatrat

Site Supporter
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 15, 2018
Messages
7,642
Reaction score
9,505
Leaking the decision was intended to shame or cause fear in the justices so as change their votes. It's called coercion.
It was intended to affect Mid-term elections, which it will...
 

oldgaranddad

Platinum Bling
Sr Midas Sup +++
Platinum Bling
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
7,054
Reaction score
15,605
Location
On the top shelf.
It was intended to affect Mid-term elections, which it will...
Not to diminish your opinion but I believe it was too far ahead of the mid-term elections to be effective. Public news cycle attention span is shorter than a ADD gnat.
 

SongSungAU

Mother Lode Found
Sr Site Supporter
Mother Lode
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
13,953
Reaction score
30,851
Other than the obvious advantage one would have knowing a verdict ahead of the herd so to speak- e.g. a wager at Las Vegas or whatever. Who is or was harmed by the leak now that it is common knowledge? Would the leak change the court's final decision?

Serious question.
The leak was a tactic to put pressure on the Supreme Court Justices to sway their vote. Nothing less than intimidation by the thugs who don't want to see Roe v. Wade overturned.

If Trump had done it in one of his rallies, you'd see the whole world condemning it.

Clarence Thomas calls leak of supreme court abortion draft ‘tremendously bad’

two excerpts of what Clarence Thomas said:

“What happened at the court was tremendously bad,” Thomas, 73, said in a dialog at a conference of conservative and libertarian thinkers in Dallas. “I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them,” he added. “And then I wonder when they’re gone or destabilized, what we’re going to have as a country.”​
“The institution that I’m a part of – if someone said that one line of one opinion would be leaked by anyone, you would say, ‘Oh, that’s impossible. No one would ever do that,’” he said. “There’s such a belief in the rule of law, belief in the court, belief in what we’re doing, that that was verboten.”​

Of course, we now have a society of people who have no moral sense of what is right and what is wrong. So anything goes as long as it achieves your outcome.

If the Supreme Court no longer functions without intimidation tactics being allowed, you may as well get rid of it. But if you do that then you may as well get rid of the U.S. Constitution. In fact, you may as well say good-bye to what America once was and rush headlong into the arms of Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum.
.
 
Last edited:

Fatrat

Site Supporter
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 15, 2018
Messages
7,642
Reaction score
9,505
34 Senate seats and all congress seats 435 are up grabs in 2022, I'll bet abortion will be fought like hell this year.
 

WillA2

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2019
Messages
4,773
Reaction score
12,802
Also, it was used for distraction.

What did tptb want to be overlooked?
 

Ensoniq

Midas Member
Midas Member
Eagle
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
13,035
Reaction score
29,892
Location
North Carolina
Other than the obvious advantage one would have knowing a verdict ahead of the herd so to speak- e.g. a wager at Las Vegas or whatever. Who is or was harmed by the leak now that it is common knowledge? Would the leak change the court's final decision?

Serious question.

If the leak changes the final decision (which is still possible) then yes it’s extremely harmful

The libs have captured every institution completely and once they can become convinced they can intimidate the court they’ll try to sway every issue every time like the maniacs they are

We should insist the court corruption remain behind closed doors like it always has
 

nickndfl

Midas Member
Midas Member
Eagle
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
18,020
Reaction score
20,351
Location
Florida
Abortions lower inflation and gas prices...
 

D-FENZ

Platinum Bling
Sr Midas Sup +++
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
4,011
Reaction score
10,966
If the leak changes the final decision (which is still possible) then yes it’s extremely harmful
Of course it would be harmful if it changed the final decision. And I don't mean to be obtuse, but is there a rational explanation behind why the leak could or would change even one of the justice's decisions?
 

Agavegirl1

Gold Chaser
Survivor
Midas Supporter ++
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
2,805
Reaction score
11,477
Location
Somewhere in the midwest
Of course it would be harmful if it changed the final decision. And I don't mean to be obtuse, but is there a rational explanation behind why the leak could or would change even one of the justice's decisions?
I don’t believe that was the intention. The leaker probably hoped the legislature would quickly codify Roe.
 

Goldhedge

Retired
Sr Midas Sup +++
Survivor
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
70,719
Reaction score
156,098
Location
Rocky Mountains
Leaking the decision was intended to shame or cause fear in the justices so as change their votes. It's called coercion.
That sounds like a crime to me... like tampering with a jury.... only a lot worse!
 

Ensoniq

Midas Member
Midas Member
Eagle
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
13,035
Reaction score
29,892
Location
North Carolina
Of course it would be harmful if it changed the final decision. And I don't mean to be obtuse, but is there a rational explanation behind why the leak could or would change even one of the justice's decisions?

I think so

The maniacs are outside their houses with pitchforks sending death threats and thinking they can intimidate the justices. I’ve read that it’s not uncommon for votes to change as they listen to each other’s arguments. Roberts famously switched his Obamacare vote at the last minute because he was worried about public reaction.

I know Roberts is already pro abortion (even though the dummies are protesting his house by mistake) but with this being 5/4 they’ve only got to pick off one of them

I think Kavanaugh is squishy and doesn’t like being unpopular. Maybe my old school bias but I struggle to accept men crying - other then when death of a loved one.
 

chieftain

Trump got them plump
Gold Chaser
Joined
Jan 4, 2020
Messages
6,039
Reaction score
10,446
So when is the full bench sitting to make (or break) this story?
 

Ensoniq

Midas Member
Midas Member
Eagle
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
13,035
Reaction score
29,892
Location
North Carolina
So when is the full bench sitting to make (or break) this story?

The court generally releases its decisions by mid June

This is close
 

Goldhedge

Retired
Sr Midas Sup +++
Survivor
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
70,719
Reaction score
156,098
Location
Rocky Mountains

Roberts Is Courting a Constitutional Crisis​

There doesn’t appear to have been a moment in our history when the potential killing of a Supreme Court justice could have had such consequential effects.

By Jeffrey H. Anderson
ag-mark_90833ec2.svg

June 9, 2022

The attempted assassination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh makes it abundantly clear that Chief Justice John Roberts is playing with fire in refusing to issue the Court’s majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that could potentially overturn Roe v. Wade. The potential for someone to make an attempt on a justice’s life was predictable once the draft majority opinion, in a shocking move, was leaked—but the threat appears more serious in the wake of a deranged person having arrived at Kavanaugh’s home with the stated intention, and with weapons in tow, to kill him.

It is hard to imagine the devastating effect upon our already polarized society, its institutions, and the Constitution itself if someone were to murder a justice in cold blood and then reap the following rewards for the assassination:
  • Because Supreme Court rulings aren’t final until released, a 5-4 ruling to overturn Roe would immediately become a 4-4 opinion, thereby leaving Roe on the books.
  • The president who would get to replace the murdered justice would be Joe Biden, who has repeatedly said he is firmly committed to keeping Roe in place.
  • The Senate that would get to confirm Biden’s nominee would be the current Democratic-controlled one, and the Democratic Party is adamantly committed to upholding Roe.
In short, an assassination could lead to Roe being upheld rather than overturned in the short term, Biden and his Democratic allies being able to replace the murdered justice with one of Biden’s choosing ahead of the midterm elections, and Roe remaining a fixture in the constitutional firmament in the long term.

There doesn’t appear to have been a prior moment in our history when the potential killing of a justice could have had such consequential effects. Roe wasn’t decided on a 5-4 vote; the murder of a justice wouldn’t have swung its 7-2 outcome. In all of American history, the only other case as contentious as Roe—and as lawless, unconstitutional, and fateful—was Dred Scott v. Sandford, which was decided on a 7-2 vote by a Southern-dominated Court. The murder of a justice wouldn’t have swung its outcome, either.

Eight years after Dred Scott, a murder did swing the outcome of Reconstruction to a significant (albeit unknowable) degree. But at least Abraham Lincoln’s political foes didn’t get to decide his replacement.

A potential assassination in our day that led to the results described above would be viewed by at least half of all Americans as being so lawless, so barbaric, so unjust, and so in defiance of fair play that it’s hard to imagine the extent of the rift that would develop or how it could potentially be healed. In that horrible circumstance, Roberts should surely cast his vote as a replacement vote for his fallen colleague’s, thereby bringing about the same result (although now by a 5-3 vote) that would have transpired had the laws of our land been followed and a justice of the Court not been killed. But there is no clear sense Roberts would do that.

It would be far easier and simpler for Roberts merely to release the majority opinion now and release the dissents later, when they are ready.
This would hardly be a radical move. When I ran the Bureau of Justice Statistics at the U.S. Department of Justice, the bureau’s long-standing policy was that if a contractor, member of the press corps, or anyone else released any of our statistics prematurely, we would depart from our existing timeline and release those statistics at that moment. The bureau believed it was better to deviate from the planned release schedule than to allow a premature release on someone else’s part to do damage. In the instance of the Supreme Court and this opinion, the potential for damage is vastly greater.

The chief justice has given every indication thus far that he is determined to treat the unscrupulous release of the draft opinion as a one-off event that won’t cause him to do anything else differently (other than trying to find the brazen perpetrator who betrayed the Court’s norms). But the extraordinary news from Kavanaugh’s home makes clear that it’s pure fantasy to pretend that nothing else has changed—that everything else can proceed as if the leak had never happened.

In fact, things have changed. The motivation to kill a justice is now too great. Too much of our nation’s commitment to civility and lawfulness is on the line. It’s time to release the majority opinion. If Roberts continues to play with fire, we could face a crisis like none we’ve ever faced before at a time when we’re perhaps least prepared as a nation to withstand it.

 

Tbonz

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
3,029
Reaction score
4,190
Location
Land of the Free

Roberts Is Courting a Constitutional Crisis​

There doesn’t appear to have been a moment in our history when the potential killing of a Supreme Court justice could have had such consequential effects.

By Jeffrey H. Anderson
ag-mark_90833ec2.svg

June 9, 2022

The attempted assassination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh makes it abundantly clear that Chief Justice John Roberts is playing with fire in refusing to issue the Court’s majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that could potentially overturn Roe v. Wade. The potential for someone to make an attempt on a justice’s life was predictable once the draft majority opinion, in a shocking move, was leaked—but the threat appears more serious in the wake of a deranged person having arrived at Kavanaugh’s home with the stated intention, and with weapons in tow, to kill him.

It is hard to imagine the devastating effect upon our already polarized society, its institutions, and the Constitution itself if someone were to murder a justice in cold blood and then reap the following rewards for the assassination:
  • Because Supreme Court rulings aren’t final until released, a 5-4 ruling to overturn Roe would immediately become a 4-4 opinion, thereby leaving Roe on the books.
  • The president who would get to replace the murdered justice would be Joe Biden, who has repeatedly said he is firmly committed to keeping Roe in place.
  • The Senate that would get to confirm Biden’s nominee would be the current Democratic-controlled one, and the Democratic Party is adamantly committed to upholding Roe.
In short, an assassination could lead to Roe being upheld rather than overturned in the short term, Biden and his Democratic allies being able to replace the murdered justice with one of Biden’s choosing ahead of the midterm elections, and Roe remaining a fixture in the constitutional firmament in the long term.

There doesn’t appear to have been a prior moment in our history when the potential killing of a justice could have had such consequential effects. Roe wasn’t decided on a 5-4 vote; the murder of a justice wouldn’t have swung its 7-2 outcome. In all of American history, the only other case as contentious as Roe—and as lawless, unconstitutional, and fateful—was Dred Scott v. Sandford, which was decided on a 7-2 vote by a Southern-dominated Court. The murder of a justice wouldn’t have swung its outcome, either.

Eight years after Dred Scott, a murder did swing the outcome of Reconstruction to a significant (albeit unknowable) degree. But at least Abraham Lincoln’s political foes didn’t get to decide his replacement.

A potential assassination in our day that led to the results described above would be viewed by at least half of all Americans as being so lawless, so barbaric, so unjust, and so in defiance of fair play that it’s hard to imagine the extent of the rift that would develop or how it could potentially be healed. In that horrible circumstance, Roberts should surely cast his vote as a replacement vote for his fallen colleague’s, thereby bringing about the same result (although now by a 5-3 vote) that would have transpired had the laws of our land been followed and a justice of the Court not been killed. But there is no clear sense Roberts would do that.

It would be far easier and simpler for Roberts merely to release the majority opinion now and release the dissents later, when they are ready.
This would hardly be a radical move. When I ran the Bureau of Justice Statistics at the U.S. Department of Justice, the bureau’s long-standing policy was that if a contractor, member of the press corps, or anyone else released any of our statistics prematurely, we would depart from our existing timeline and release those statistics at that moment. The bureau believed it was better to deviate from the planned release schedule than to allow a premature release on someone else’s part to do damage. In the instance of the Supreme Court and this opinion, the potential for damage is vastly greater.

The chief justice has given every indication thus far that he is determined to treat the unscrupulous release of the draft opinion as a one-off event that won’t cause him to do anything else differently (other than trying to find the brazen perpetrator who betrayed the Court’s norms). But the extraordinary news from Kavanaugh’s home makes clear that it’s pure fantasy to pretend that nothing else has changed—that everything else can proceed as if the leak had never happened.

In fact, things have changed. The motivation to kill a justice is now too great. Too much of our nation’s commitment to civility and lawfulness is on the line. It’s time to release the majority opinion. If Roberts continues to play with fire, we could face a crisis like none we’ve ever faced before at a time when we’re perhaps least prepared as a nation to withstand it.

It is my opinion that there has already been a murder of a Supreme Court justice. They found him dead in his bed, no autopsy and no investigation. This was the first attempt, again IMHO.

I don't believe that Roberts is in a position to withhold the case once there has been a majority ruling. Is it possible that the position was leaked to prevent the left from "eliminating" a justice before the decision was announced?

Our government has not been working in the interest of the people, go back to the 1964/1968 Civil Rights legislation. The assassination of a sitting POTUS, the $19 TRILLION (USD) that has been spent on "helping" minorities enrich their lives has been wasted, ask the minorities.

Abortion, look at the stats, has killed off millions of black babies, the end goal of the witch that started Planned Parenthood. Murder is murder, nothing more nothing less. It makes me want to puke the willingness of people that value life so little, that they are willing to throw it away/sell it as medical waste.

I can not fathom any reason that someone would be so willing to vote for LIBERALS, when the end goal is genocide of a population of innocent people, and yet the DEMONCRATS say Repbulicans/Conservatives are racists?!????
 

the_shootist

Checked out! Good luck!
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
83,250
Reaction score
184,144
I don't particularly care about these theatrical issues as the entire US government, all three branches, have been undermined and compromised by foreign powers which are currently in control!

Everything we see and hear happening within the 'government' has a hidden purpose. Nothing is as it seems so, as brother Irons so eloquently states, we're being played...and I ain't playin!
 

Goldbrix

Mother Lode Found
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
22,985
Reaction score
36,837
Some of us still believe the SCOTUS answers the bell and opens their eyes to the ploy of Destroying the American Way.
I pray there is still some modicum of common sense remaining in DC.
 

Irons

Outlaw Prospector
Survivor
GIM Hall Of Fame
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
33,075
Reaction score
69,022
Some of us still believe the SCOTUS answers the bell and opens their eyes to the ploy of Destroying the American Way.
I pray there is still some modicum of common sense remaining in DC.
I wish I could say the same, but all I see is the undercarriage of the bus we've been thrown under.



.
 

Ensoniq

Midas Member
Midas Member
Eagle
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
13,035
Reaction score
29,892
Location
North Carolina
It is my opinion that there has already been a murder of a Supreme Court justice. They found him dead in his bed, no autopsy and no investigation. This was the first attempt, again IMHO.

I don't believe that Roberts is in a position to withhold the case once there has been a majority ruling. Is it possible that the position was leaked to prevent the left from "eliminating" a justice before the decision was announced?

Our government has not been working in the interest of the people, go back to the 1964/1968 Civil Rights legislation. The assassination of a sitting POTUS, the $19 TRILLION (USD) that has been spent on "helping" minorities enrich their lives has been wasted, ask the minorities.

Abortion, look at the stats, has killed off millions of black babies, the end goal of the witch that started Planned Parenthood. Murder is murder, nothing more nothing less. It makes me want to puke the willingness of people that value life so little, that they are willing to throw it away/sell it as medical waste.

I can not fathom any reason that someone would be so willing to vote for LIBERALS, when the end goal is genocide of a population of innocent people, and yet the DEMONCRATS say Repbulicans/Conservatives are racists?!????
we’ll written article and I don't mean to minimize the severity and new leftist low of the assassination attempt

But, i don’t think this is correct. There is typically a time period after conference vote (when the decision is final) before the opinion is released to the public.

they need to finish polishing the written opinions, dissents and sometimes justices that vote on the same side do so for different reasons and need to write a third opinion.

This time period varies but we’re so close to the middle if June the short odds are it’s final but not announced and they're still polishing the documentation
 

Goldhedge

Retired
Sr Midas Sup +++
Survivor
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
70,719
Reaction score
156,098
Location
Rocky Mountains