SCOTUS

[Seacoaster(1)]

Sen Susan Collins: “If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office..”

Sucker born every minute...

At a certain point, you just have to laugh to survive. She really is a chucklehead.

That's politics. Frankly, I don't believe she's surprised in the least. She simply says what's needed to be said to give her political cover.

Yeah, I think that's probably right AOD.

[RedFromMI]

On my Twitter was an interesting note - the Ds ought to try to pass a law encoding the Obergerfell decision. Might actually get 60 votes in the Senate, and would press the Rs to stand on one side or the other about this particular decision.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Here's a video compendium of Suzie-Q's statements on Kavanaugh and Roe:

https://twitter.com/jd_durkin/status/15 ... 3915271170

Red, good questions. Will Collins -- therefore -- support a statutory codification of Roe? Cue the pearl-clutching.

[a fan]

Sen Susan Collins: “If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office..”

Sucker born every minute...

At a certain point, you just have to laugh to survive. She really is a chucklehead.

That's politics. Frankly, I don't believe she's surprised in the least. She simply says what's needed to be said to give her political cover.

Yeah, I think that's probably right AOD.

Wondering what Republican strategists think of this?

Unless I somehow misunderstand what just happened, they just made every single Congressional seat----and the Presidency-----about your right to an abortion. Permanently.

Can't imagine that's a great strategy, considering that most Republicans are pro-choice at some level. Add in that Southern States make getting one that a Republican would approve of, next to impossible to get for the poor.....and you have a real problem here.

Meanwhile, a Colorado Public Radio piece interviewed Denver hospital Admin. who said they are adding staff and expanding because of women coming here for services.

As everyone TRIED to tell pro-lifers.....these laws don't affect the rich. It's yet another "stick it to the poor" law. Awesome. Way to go.

To me? This is one more example of politicians deepening the divisions between have's and have not's. One set of rules, laws, and regulations for the rich....and one set for the poor.

[jhu72]

Schumer is already on record the Senate will be forced to vote, go on record. This is a 70-30 issue.

[cradleandshoot]

What Justice Alito has said in the leaked decision by some SCUMBAG FLP.. :

Are you sure about this?

I'm sure somebody leaked it, which is unprecedented in the history of the SCOTUS until today. The question would be valid to say... WHY???

Well, yes, of course it was leaked. But you ascribed the leak to some . . . .

So my question is, are you sure that's who leaked it?

Since a leak of this type is unprecedented in SCOTUS history.. what party benefits from such a disgusting breech of protocol??????????????????

[cradleandshoot]

Sen Susan Collins: “If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office..”

Sucker born every minute...

Hence why deliberations by the SCOTUS justices should never be leaked before they are announced to the public. Nobody on this forum gives 2 chits about that. So political scumbaggery has infiltrated the SCOTUS.. if it serves a purpose. The end justifies the means after all. I can only wait for this forums resident FLP liberal republican to justify this chicanery. I'm sure he will do so.

[AOD]

What Justice Alito has said in the leaked decision by some SCUMBAG FLP.. :

Are you sure about this?

I'm sure somebody leaked it, which is unprecedented in the history of the SCOTUS until today. The question would be valid to say... WHY???

Well, yes, of course it was leaked. But you ascribed the leak to some . . . .

So my question is, are you sure that's who leaked it?

Since a leak of this type is unprecedented in SCOTUS history.. what party benefits from such a disgusting breech of protocol??????????????????

What party does the Chief belong to? He is among the dissenters in the draft opinion.

[ggait]

Thank you for your input ggait. The problem with what Alito is doing shoots the concept of stare decisi all to hell. Some of us may disagree with the original Roe v Wade decision. The case was decided and if we open the can of worms of overturning cases already decided in the SCOTUS.. neither party will like the outcome of that.

Agree. Alito's approach would be judicial activism on steroids. TBD if he'll have five votes for that approach end of day.

Alito's draft is the furthest you could possibly get from judicial conservatism. You just don't overturn 50 years of precedent with a 5-4 party line vote. When you overturn something, the precedent should be clearly wrong/bad (like Plessy), and the overturn should be much more decisive (i.e. 9-0 vote for Brown v. Board of Ed). FYI, Roe was 7-2 with 5 R votes in 1973. The plurality opinion in Casey in 1992 was written by three R justices. So Alito is saying, basically, the Kennedy and O'Connor are complete idiots. And so is Roberts.

The reasonable conservative thing to do here is to uphold the Miss law which would move the line from Roe's 23 weeks back to 15 weeks. Really not that big a deal. But not allow the crazy stuff like in Texas (6 weeks). I think Roberts and Kav will land here, maybe Gorsuch too. Which would deprive the Alito position of the 5 votes it needs to become law of the land.

FYI, 43% of abortions are 6 weeks or less; 36% 7-9 weeks; 13% 10-13 weeks; 3% 14-15 weeks.

[RedFromMI]

What Justice Alito has said in the leaked decision by some SCUMBAG FLP.. :

Are you sure about this?

I'm sure somebody leaked it, which is unprecedented in the history of the SCOTUS until today. The question would be valid to say... WHY???

Well, yes, of course it was leaked. But you ascribed the leak to some . . . .

So my question is, are you sure that's who leaked it?

Since a leak of this type is unprecedented in SCOTUS history.. what party benefits from such a disgusting breech of protocol??????????????????

There have been leaks before - but not necessarily as widely publicized one as this. Years ago they used an outside printer, and there were enough leaks that the court made the decision to bring all printing in house. The Bostock decision was apparently leaked by conservative clerks or justices afraid of losing Gorsuch...

And you can make logical arguments that multiple parties have an interest in seeing this one leak. Everything from put it out to make a real decision that does not go as far seem "reasonable" to someone who thinks like Roberts and wants to slow walk the transition to overturning RvW to avoid the obvious _political_ ramifications of a full override, so someone who wants to shock the system to rally some sort of "troops" so to speak which does NOT have to be someone on the other side. The Rs have been promising this for about 50 years, so letting their side know the decision is going to go your way might have some value as well.

Remember that the decision itself is also kind of toxic politically so there might be further interest in seeing the reaction before making certain statements in an opinion.

[MDlaxfan76]

Sen Susan Collins: “If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office..”

Sucker born every minute...

Hence why deliberations by the SCOTUS justices should never be leaked before they are announced to the public. Nobody on this forum gives 2 chits about that. So political scumbaggery has infiltrated the SCOTUS.. if it serves a purpose. The end justifies the means after all. I can only wait for this forums resident FLP liberal republican to justify this chicanery. I'm sure he will do so.

I assume you mean me?

I dunno who leaked this, or even if it's a credible leak, though experts are saying it sure looks like it.

Yes, clearly "political scumbaggery has infiltrated SCOTUS"...that is, if this is accurate and it's accurate that the decision is 5-4 with Roberts voting against, as is also being reported.

And that's without a leak.

So, ok, someone felt there would be a benefit of finding out what the public thinks of the reasoning of the decision, before it is ultimately finalized. Could have been one of the 5, wanting to see where the legal issues would be, before finalization.

Could have been Roberts, trying desperately to put pressure against this, given his concern about preserving the public's confidence in the Court and knowing that the esteem the Court is held in would plummet from such a decision, given the assurances by the past 3 nominees to follow precedent, respect "the law of the land" that they agreed Roe is...knowing that the machinations by McConnell to prevent Obama's nominee from even getting a hearing, then rushing through Trump's third in one term, would be seen as incredible "political scumbaggery" made real.

Or could have been one of the 3 other dissenting justices or any of their staffs, totally outraged and hoping against hope that the public reaction would moderate this version from being the final vote. Might be a staff member of one of the 5, as not all such should be assumed to be staunchly anti-Roe.

Yup.

But your outrage, cradle, is about the leak, not the content? Very telling.

[ggait]

What party does the Chief belong to? He is among the dissenters in the draft opinion.

About 10 different theories circulating on who leaked the opinion and why?

The one that makes the most sense tactically is that Roberts himself did it. But that's the least likely to have actually occurred.

Especially since Roberts announced today that he is launching an investigation.

I'd put $2 on a lefty law clerk.

Roberts also confirmed the draft is genuine.

[jhu72]

Don't think it is a clerk. More likely to be a supreme. (1) Alito to freeze the 5 votes, play the you can't give in to pressure card; (2) Roberts to push one or more of the 5 to reason, see what you are doing, this is bad for the court and country - likely Kav; (3) one of the liberals, likely Breyer, because he has been wrong, believing in the court, not being just politics. This is a tempest in a teacup. There have been leaks before, will be again. Can see an argument for making this a crime if a clerk did it, not if a supreme did it. Could argue theft if clerk, not if supreme - they have right to it. I doubt we will find out who done it.

Everyone had a motive, its like Death on the Nile.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Don't think it is a clerk. More likely to be a supreme. (1) Alito to freeze the 5 votes, play the you can't give in to pressure card; (2) Roberts to push one or more of the 5 to reason, see what you are doing, this is bad for the court and country - likely Kav; (3) one of the liberals, likely Breyer, because he has been wrong, believing in the court, not being just politics. This is a tempest in a teacup. There have been leaks before, will be again. Can see an argument for making this a crime if a clerk did it, not if a supreme did it. Could argue theft if clerk, not if supreme - they have right to it. I doubt we will find out who done it.

Everyone had a motive, its like Death on the Nile.

Watched it on Sunday.

[cradleandshoot]

Sen Susan Collins: “If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office..”

Sucker born every minute...

Hence why deliberations by the SCOTUS justices should never be leaked before they are announced to the public. Nobody on this forum gives 2 chits about that. So political scumbaggery has infiltrated the SCOTUS.. if it serves a purpose. The end justifies the means after all. I can only wait for this forums resident FLP liberal republican to justify this chicanery. I'm sure he will do so.

I assume you mean me?

I dunno who leaked this, or even if it's a credible leak, though experts are saying it sure looks like it.

Yes, clearly "political scumbaggery has infiltrated SCOTUS"...that is, if this is accurate and it's accurate that the decision is 5-4 with Roberts voting against, as is also being reported.

And that's without a leak.

So, ok, someone felt there would be a benefit of finding out what the public thinks of the reasoning of the decision, before it is ultimately finalized. Could have been one of the 5, wanting to see where the legal issues would be, before finalization.

Could have been Roberts, trying desperately to put pressure against this, given his concern about preserving the public's confidence in the Court and knowing that the esteem the Court is held in would plummet from such a decision, given the assurances by the past 3 nominees to follow precedent, respect "the law of the land" that they agreed Roe is...knowing that the machinations by McConnell to prevent Obama's nominee from even getting a hearing, then rushing through Trump's third in one term, would be seen as incredible "political scumbaggery" made real.

Or could have been one of the 3 other dissenting justices or any of their staffs, totally outraged and hoping against hope that the public reaction would moderate this version from being the final vote. Might be a staff member of one of the 5, as not all such should be assumed to be staunchly anti-Roe.

Yup.

But your outrage, cradle, is about the leak, not the content? Very telling.

No I did not mean you. My outrage is about the leak. I'm willing to bet that the leaker will be found out fairly quickly and offered a job at CNN or MSNBC making big Yes it is scumbaggery and one more reason why nobody trusts our government anymore.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Don't think it is a clerk. More likely to be a supreme. (1) Alito to freeze the 5 votes, play the you can't give in to pressure card; (2) Roberts to push one or more of the 5 to reason, see what you are doing, this is bad for the court and country - likely Kav; (3) one of the liberals, likely Breyer, because he has been wrong, believing in the court, not being just politics. This is a tempest in a teacup. There have been leaks before, will be again. Can see an argument for making this a crime if a clerk did it, not if a supreme did it. Could argue theft if clerk, not if supreme - they have right to it. I doubt we will find out who done it.

Everyone had a motive, its like Death on the Nile.

Watched it on Sunday.

They were all in on it together -- Murder on the Orient Express.

[ggait]

It was Mrs. Ginni Thomas, with the scanner, in the RV.

[Seacoaster(1)]

It was Mrs. Ginni Thomas, with the scanner, in the RV.

Hah! At Daytona.

[Peter Brown]

Sen Susan Collins: “If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office..”

Sucker born every minute...

Hence why deliberations by the SCOTUS justices should never be leaked before they are announced to the public. Nobody on this forum gives 2 chits about that. So political scumbaggery has infiltrated the SCOTUS.. if it serves a purpose. The end justifies the means after all. I can only wait for this forums resident FLP liberal republican to justify this chicanery. I'm sure he will do so.

I assume you mean me?

I dunno who leaked this, or even if it's a credible leak, though experts are saying it sure looks like it.

Yes, clearly "political scumbaggery has infiltrated SCOTUS"...that is, if this is accurate and it's accurate that the decision is 5-4 with Roberts voting against, as is also being reported.

And that's without a leak.

So, ok, someone felt there would be a benefit of finding out what the public thinks of the reasoning of the decision, before it is ultimately finalized. Could have been one of the 5, wanting to see where the legal issues would be, before finalization.

Could have been Roberts, trying desperately to put pressure against this, given his concern about preserving the public's confidence in the Court and knowing that the esteem the Court is held in would plummet from such a decision, given the assurances by the past 3 nominees to follow precedent, respect "the law of the land" that they agreed Roe is...knowing that the machinations by McConnell to prevent Obama's nominee from even getting a hearing, then rushing through Trump's third in one term, would be seen as incredible "political scumbaggery" made real.

Or could have been one of the 3 other dissenting justices or any of their staffs, totally outraged and hoping against hope that the public reaction would moderate this version from being the final vote. Might be a staff member of one of the 5, as not all such should be assumed to be staunchly anti-Roe.

Yup.

But your outrage, cradle, is about the leak, not the content? Very telling.

No I did not mean you. My outrage is about the leak. I'm willing to bet that the leaker will be found out fairly quickly and offered a job at CNN or MSNBC making big Yes it is scumbaggery and one more reason why nobody trusts our government anymore.

Unfortunately it’s not likely a violation of criminal law. It was only a draft. It should be a crime given the enormity of what the clerk to Sotomajor was trying to do. But alas, draft opinions aren’t exactly federal property.

That said, in an interrogation with the feds, if the leftist clown dweeb clerk who works for Sotomajor who leaked this lies, then you’ve got the crime that trips up everyone.

And of course the ‘party of norms’ will gleefully hire this clerk to MSNBC.

[NattyBohChamps04]

Sen Susan Collins: “If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office..”

Sucker born every minute...

Hence why deliberations by the SCOTUS justices should never be leaked before they are announced to the public.

Ironic because a decision like that would limit our right to privacy.