NWS Nieuws & Achtergronden
Discussieer hier diepgaander over de actualiteiten.
Supreme Court Overturns Roe v. Wade, Eliminates Constitutional Right to Abortion
A deeply divided Supreme Court eliminated the constitutional right to an abortion, overruling the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and leaving the question of abortion’s legality to the states.
The court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization upheld a law from Mississippi that bans abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, roughly two months earlier than what has been allowed under Supreme Court precedent dating back to Roe.
In siding with Mississippi, the court’s conservative majority said the Roe decision was egregiously wrong in recognizing a constitutional right to an abortion, an error the court perpetuated in the decades since.
Although the case before the court involved a 15-week ban, the overruling of Roe gives states broad latitude to regulate or prohibit abortion as they see fit. Many conservative-leaning states are poised to tighten access further, while some liberal ones have established permissive abortion regimes under state law. The decision could become a major issue in this year’s elections, as state and federal lawmakers look to position themselves in a post-Roe world.
Almost half the states have laws in place or at the ready to curtail or outlaw abortion, while others have laws that would preserve its legality. Questions on whether and how to limit abortions are expected to continue roiling state legislative debates.
The ruling, one of the most consequential in modern memory, marked a rare instance in which the court reversed itself to eliminate a constitutional right that it had previously created.
The decision also is a defining moment for a Supreme Court that is more conservative than it has been in many decades, a shift in legal thinking made possible after President Donald Trump placed three justices on the court. Two of them succeeded justices who voted to affirm abortion rights.
In anticipation of the ruling, several states have passed laws limiting or banning the procedure, and 13 states have so-called trigger laws on their books that called for prohibiting abortion if Roe were overruled. Clinics in conservative states have been preparing for possible closure, while facilities in more liberal areas have been getting ready for a potentially heavy influx of patients from other states.
The ruling follows a highly unusual leak last month of an early draft opinion in the case that suggested the court was preparing to overrule Roe and withdraw federal protections for abortion rights.
The Supreme Court has been investigating the leak at a time of strained relationships among members of the court. Justice Clarence Thomas in a recent speech suggested trust among members of the court had been lost. And when the court heard oral arguments in the Dobbs case in December, Justice Sonia Sotomayor questioned whether the court could “survive the stench” created by perceptions “that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts.”
The court’s Roe decision in 1973, written by Nixon appointee Justice Harry Blackmun, reflected a line of legal thinking that the Constitution barred political majorities from imposing their moral judgments on the intimate choices of individuals. The Roe court grounded the right to an abortion in the 14th Amendment’s guarantee that states can’t deprive individuals of life and liberty without due process of law. The ruling built off a constitutionally recognized right to privacy, which came when the court struck down state restrictions on contraceptives.
That ruling didn’t spark an immediate outcry, but by the Reagan era, it had become a rallying point for conservatives who believed the high court had improperly invented rights not laid out in the Constitution, usurping the political branches of government. The issue of abortion has hung over the Supreme Court ever since, as well as the Senate confirmation process for new justices.
Mr. Trump pledged to appoint justices who would overrule Roe, and when he named Justice Amy Coney Barrett to succeed the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the court’s conservative majority grew to six justices. That gave hope to abortion opponents that aggressive new state measures might find high-court support and led some, including Mississippi, to call on the court to overrule Roe.
The court does on occasion overrule its past decisions—notably, for instance in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision that ended racial segregation in public schools—but justices for years have dueled over when it is appropriate to do so. Most of those debates have taken place in cases that had nothing to do with abortion, but the future of Roe has loomed over the discussions.
The Supreme Court in 1992 came close to overruling Roe, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a case involving abortion restrictions in Pennsylvania. But internal deliberations led the court to preserve core protections for abortion rights, under a controlling opinion forged by three GOP appointees.
Mississippi’s law, the Gestational Age Act, was adopted in 2018 and initially designed as a more incremental attack on abortion. At the time, a full legal assault on Roe had no realistic chance of success because Justice Anthony Kennedy, a maverick conservative, stood alongside Justice Ginsburg and three other liberal justices in forming a solid majority to keep abortion rights in place.
The case began when the state’s only provider, the Jackson Women’s Health Organization, sued to strike down the 15-week law.
After Justice Kennedy later in 2018 retired and Justice Ginsburg died in 2020, Mississippi shifted gears in how it defended its restrictions. After previously arguing its law could be upheld without jettisoning all constitutional protections for abortion, the state urged the high court to ditch Roe and Casey altogether.
A deeply divided Supreme Court eliminated the constitutional right to an abortion, overruling the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and leaving the question of abortion’s legality to the states.
The court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization upheld a law from Mississippi that bans abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, roughly two months earlier than what has been allowed under Supreme Court precedent dating back to Roe.
In siding with Mississippi, the court’s conservative majority said the Roe decision was egregiously wrong in recognizing a constitutional right to an abortion, an error the court perpetuated in the decades since.
Although the case before the court involved a 15-week ban, the overruling of Roe gives states broad latitude to regulate or prohibit abortion as they see fit. Many conservative-leaning states are poised to tighten access further, while some liberal ones have established permissive abortion regimes under state law. The decision could become a major issue in this year’s elections, as state and federal lawmakers look to position themselves in a post-Roe world.
Almost half the states have laws in place or at the ready to curtail or outlaw abortion, while others have laws that would preserve its legality. Questions on whether and how to limit abortions are expected to continue roiling state legislative debates.
The ruling, one of the most consequential in modern memory, marked a rare instance in which the court reversed itself to eliminate a constitutional right that it had previously created.
The decision also is a defining moment for a Supreme Court that is more conservative than it has been in many decades, a shift in legal thinking made possible after President Donald Trump placed three justices on the court. Two of them succeeded justices who voted to affirm abortion rights.
In anticipation of the ruling, several states have passed laws limiting or banning the procedure, and 13 states have so-called trigger laws on their books that called for prohibiting abortion if Roe were overruled. Clinics in conservative states have been preparing for possible closure, while facilities in more liberal areas have been getting ready for a potentially heavy influx of patients from other states.
The ruling follows a highly unusual leak last month of an early draft opinion in the case that suggested the court was preparing to overrule Roe and withdraw federal protections for abortion rights.
The Supreme Court has been investigating the leak at a time of strained relationships among members of the court. Justice Clarence Thomas in a recent speech suggested trust among members of the court had been lost. And when the court heard oral arguments in the Dobbs case in December, Justice Sonia Sotomayor questioned whether the court could “survive the stench” created by perceptions “that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts.”
The court’s Roe decision in 1973, written by Nixon appointee Justice Harry Blackmun, reflected a line of legal thinking that the Constitution barred political majorities from imposing their moral judgments on the intimate choices of individuals. The Roe court grounded the right to an abortion in the 14th Amendment’s guarantee that states can’t deprive individuals of life and liberty without due process of law. The ruling built off a constitutionally recognized right to privacy, which came when the court struck down state restrictions on contraceptives.
That ruling didn’t spark an immediate outcry, but by the Reagan era, it had become a rallying point for conservatives who believed the high court had improperly invented rights not laid out in the Constitution, usurping the political branches of government. The issue of abortion has hung over the Supreme Court ever since, as well as the Senate confirmation process for new justices.
Mr. Trump pledged to appoint justices who would overrule Roe, and when he named Justice Amy Coney Barrett to succeed the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the court’s conservative majority grew to six justices. That gave hope to abortion opponents that aggressive new state measures might find high-court support and led some, including Mississippi, to call on the court to overrule Roe.
The court does on occasion overrule its past decisions—notably, for instance in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision that ended racial segregation in public schools—but justices for years have dueled over when it is appropriate to do so. Most of those debates have taken place in cases that had nothing to do with abortion, but the future of Roe has loomed over the discussions.
The Supreme Court in 1992 came close to overruling Roe, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a case involving abortion restrictions in Pennsylvania. But internal deliberations led the court to preserve core protections for abortion rights, under a controlling opinion forged by three GOP appointees.
Mississippi’s law, the Gestational Age Act, was adopted in 2018 and initially designed as a more incremental attack on abortion. At the time, a full legal assault on Roe had no realistic chance of success because Justice Anthony Kennedy, a maverick conservative, stood alongside Justice Ginsburg and three other liberal justices in forming a solid majority to keep abortion rights in place.
The case began when the state’s only provider, the Jackson Women’s Health Organization, sued to strike down the 15-week law.
After Justice Kennedy later in 2018 retired and Justice Ginsburg died in 2020, Mississippi shifted gears in how it defended its restrictions. After previously arguing its law could be upheld without jettisoning all constitutional protections for abortion, the state urged the high court to ditch Roe and Casey altogether.
Je maintiendrai -XOXO-
Er zijn 3.6 miljoen bevallingen elk jaar in de US. Dus ja 800.000 abortussen komt neer op 25%quote:Op zaterdag 25 juni 2022 00:32 schreef Whiskers2009 het volgende:
[..]
Je weet hoeveel inwoners de VS heeft? En ja, ik weet dat dat niet allemaal vrouwen zijn, dus deel dat door 2 en zet dat af tegen je "800.000" abortussen
Er echt heeeeel raar dat er bij de allerarmsten meer abortussen gepleegd worden dan bij andere groepen. Not.
Je maintiendrai -XOXO-
quote:Op zaterdag 25 juni 2022 00:37 schreef datismijnmening het volgende:
[..]
Er zijn 3.6 miljoen bevallingen elk jaar in de US. Dus ja 800.000 abortussen komt neer op 25%
Nooit rekenen geleerd?
"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
Nogmaals: nooit rekenen geleerd?quote:
[..]
Maak er 20% van en het is nog steeds een absurd aantal.
Hoe kom je erbij abortussen af te zetten tegen voldragen zwangerschappen en dan een percentage te berekenen?
Ik zou hierdoor je verontwaardiging nog bijna (!) gaan snappen ook
"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
Omdat 99.9 procent van die abortussen voldragen zwangerschappen zouden zijn.quote:
[..]
Nogmaals: nooit rekenen geleerd?
Hoe kom je erbij abortussen af te zetten tegen voldragen zwangerschappen?
Je maintiendrai -XOXO-
Meid, je maakt een dikke denkfout..quote:
[..]
Omdat 99.9 procent van die abortussen voldragen zwangerschappen zouden zijn.
"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
quote:
[..]
Meid, je maskt een dikke denkfout..
Je maintiendrai -XOXO-
Omdat het zinvoller is als je zelf ontdekt waar je denkfout zitquote:
"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
De meeste zwangerschappen eindigen in een miskraam. God is de grootste aborteerder ever.quote:
[..]
Omdat 99.9 procent van die abortussen voldragen zwangerschappen zouden zijn.
Wut? Hoe kom je daarbij?quote:
[..]
De meeste zwangerschappen eindigen in een miskraam. God is de grootste aborteerder ever.
Je maintiendrai -XOXO-
Afgezien daarvan: de rekensom klopt van geen kanten.quote:
[..]
De meeste zwangerschappen eindigen in een miskraam. God is de grootste aborteerder ever.
"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
nee schat. Jij ontkend omdat je zelf ook weet dat abortus barbaars is.quote:
[..]
Omdat het zinvoller is als je zelf ontdekt waar je denkfout zit
Je maintiendrai -XOXO-
Dat wist je niet? Meeste zwangerschappen eindigen inderdaad in een (zéér vroege) "miskraam". Jij zal het wel geen "miskraam" willen noemen, anderen vinden een.klompje celken dan weer geen "baby"quote:
"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
Google. In de eerste 4 weken is de kans al 50% en daarna is het voor iedere leeftijd boven de 10%. Ergo: merendeel van de zwangerschappen eindigt in een miskraam. Gezien god het zo ontworpen heeft/zijn plan is, is hij de grootste aborteerder ever.quote:
Een mislukte bevruchting is toch geen miskraam.quote:
[..]
Dat wist je niet? Meeste zwangerschappen eindigen inderdaad in een (zéér vroege) "miskraam". Jij zal het wel geen "miskraam" willen noemen, anderen vinden een.klompje celken dan weer geen "baby"
Je maintiendrai -XOXO-
Serieus? Je ziet je eigen denkfout niet?quote:
[..]
nee schat. Jij ontkend omdat je zelf ook weet dat abortus barbaars is.
Je snapt werkelijk niet waarom je het aantal miskramen niet als percentage van het aantal voldragen zwangerschappen kunt berekenen?
En nee, ik vind het absoluut NIET barbaars.
"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
Nee, een mislukte bevruchting is dat inderdaad niet. Daar gaat het dan ook niet over.quote:
[..]
Een mislukte bevruchting is toch geen miskraam.
"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
Ik zei niet miskramen. Ik zei abortussen.quote:
[..]
Serieus? Je ziet je eigen denkfout niet?
Je snapt werkelijk niet waarom je het aantal miskramen niet als percentage van het aantal voldragen zwangerschappen kunt berekenen?
En nee, ik vind het absoluut NIET barbaars.
Je maintiendrai -XOXO-
Excuus: daar moet abortussen staan.quote:
[..]
Ik zei niet miskramen. Ik zei abortussen.
Het is laat en zette onwillekeurig miskramen neer omdat dat was waar de laatste post die ik las over ging.
"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
En kan een mod deze reeksen please? Thanks. 
Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
Far across the moonbeam I know that's who you are
Far across the moonbeam I know that's who you are
Hoe moeilijk is de rekensom? 3.6 miljoen + 0.8 mil = 4.4 08/4.4 = +-20%quote:
[..]
Excuus: daar moet abortussen staan.
Je maintiendrai -XOXO-
Kennelijk erg moeilijk. Aangezien je sowieso al begint het asntal abortussen te berekenen als percentage vh aantal voldragen zwangerschappen..quote:
[..]
Hoe moeilijk is de rekensom? 3.6 miljoen + 0.8 mil = 4.4 08/4.4 = +-20%
Daarnaast bestaat ook nog zo iets als miskramen om maar wat te noemen...
"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
niet relevant in deze.quote:
[..]
Er nestaat ook nog zo iets als miskramen om maar wat te noemen...
Je maintiendrai -XOXO-
Bevruchting is bij die 50% wel gelukt slimmie.quote:
[..]
Een mislukte bevruchting is toch geen miskraam.
