Armed Polite Society

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

R.I.P. Scout26

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13

Author Topic: Being reported the Supreme Court has voted to strike down Roe v. Wade  (Read 4226 times)

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 29,770

I'm not sure there's a statute that clearly applies for even a slap on the wrist, let alone real prison time. This stuff isn't classified.
I think you may be right from some other commentary I have heard.  They probably could get the person disbarred which would be a pretty serious hit for an SC law clerk. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

Brad Johnson

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16,553
  • Witty, charming, handsome, and completely insane.

I think you may be right from some other commentary I have heard.  They probably could get the person disbarred which would be a pretty serious hit for an SC law clerk. 

I would imagine there is some ethics clause in their licensing which addresses confidentiality, personal conduct, and professional integrity. Even if there isn't, for-cause dismissal from a SCOTUS internship carries it's own stigma.

Brad
It's all about the pancakes, people.
"And he thought cops wouldn't chase... a STOLEN DONUT TRUCK???? That would be like Willie Nelson ignoring a pickup full of weed."
-HankB

RocketMan

  • Mad Rocket Scientist
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,973
  • Semper Fidelis

Quote from the SCOTUS public information statement:  "Justices circulate draft opinions internally as a routine and essential part of the Court's confidential deliberative work."
That would seem to imply there is, at a minimum, an internal rules process that the leaker broke.  Given that the Chief Justice has directed the Marshal of the Court to investigate, that would also imply the leaker will face consequences should they be found out.

US Code 18 U.S.C 641 might apply for criminal prosecution if it is stretched a bit.  It is typically taken to mean stealing or conveying government property to give to another outside agency or individual for monetary gain.  But the way the word "convey" is used in the statute, it does not firmly imply the conveyance must be for monetary gain.
If there really was intelligent life on other planets, we'd be sending them foreign aid.

Conservatives see George Orwell's "1984" as a cautionary tale.  Progressives view it as a "how to" manual.

My wife often says to me, "You are evil and must be destroyed." She may be right.

How many Democrats does it take to fix a problem?  No one knows because it's never happened.

HankB

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,015

Stigma for dismissal?

You think a law clerk dismissed for leaking this memo would NOT be hired in an eyeblink by any member of "The Squad," Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, or any of a number of other extreme leftists? Especially if they could somehow "spin" the dismissal in a way to satisfy their own constituency to make a claim of women's rights, racism, or something else along the same lines? I mean, there are ALREADY some media types cheering this person on. (See the link Ben included in his post around 11 or 12  places up.)

Disbarment would be a speed bump in the career path and close a number of doors - but maybe, just maybe, it wouldn't put the person into a food service career. ESPECIALLY if the leaker isn't a straight white male.
Trump won in 2016. Democrats haven't been so offended since Republicans came along and freed their slaves.
Those who work for a living are being BURIED by those who vote for a living.
Government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advance auction in stolen goods. - H.L. Mencken
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it. - Mark Twain

DittoHead

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,451
  • Writing for the Bulwark since August 2019

The only thing I can imagine is if the final draft is more watered down and someone wanted to leak an earlier draft.  That doesn't make as much sense.

My theory (that I have nothing to support) is that Roberts himself had it leaked in order to soften the blowback. He knows the votes are there and the reaction is going to be bad, no way around it. But this way, instead of having the singular flashpoint event of the final ruling being released, it's spread out. Now half the people are talking about the leak itself and who did it. It's also harder to protest something that hasn't actually happened yet so while there will be protests they won't be as bad. When the final ruling comes down and it's slightly watered down there will be protests again but people will have already had some time to accept it and be slightly less riotous. Less white hot rage heading right into the elections.
It used to be that we got into genuine debates about whether you’re more of a conservative or a moderate. We used to debate over ideology. And now it is how far you can go down the rabbit hole of conspiracy theories. And if you’re unwilling to do it, it doesn’t matter if you’re pro-life, if you’ve never voted for a tax increase. It doesn’t matter. It’s all about going deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole, unfortunately.

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 29,770

Quote from the SCOTUS public information statement:  "Justices circulate draft opinions internally as a routine and essential part of the Court's confidential deliberative work."
That would seem to imply there is, at a minimum, an internal rules process that the leaker broke.  Given that the Chief Justice has directed the Marshal of the Court to investigate, that would also imply the leaker will face consequences should they be found out.
Given some of the wording, do we think this opinion represents something that will make it to the final ruling?   I can't imagine why anyone would bother to leak it if is wasn't representative of the final ruling.  Can any of you think of any other good reason someone would do that? 

Thanks for answering ahead of time DittoHead.   =)
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

K Frame

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 37,942
  • I Am Inimical

Apparently this isn't the first time there have been leaks from the Supreme Court...

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-leaks-are-rare-but-not-unprecedented
Carbon Monoxide, sucking the life out of idiots, 'tards, and fools since man tamed fire.

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,241
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim

If this going to be the final decision from SCOTUS, I can see a whole lot of interstate travel rights cases in the future.

I.e. Oklahoma creates a law to ban citizens of Oklahoma from seeking an abortion from a state where it is legal or Oklahoma can fine a doctor in an abortion legal state for performing an abortion on a citizen of Oklahoma.
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

Perd Hapley

  • The Great Negro
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 58,148
  • Radicalized since 1776 - beep/bop/boop

If this going to be the final decision from SCOTUS, I can see a whole lot of interstate travel rights cases in the future.

I.e. Oklahoma creates a law to ban citizens of Oklahoma from seeking an abortion from a state where it is legal or Oklahoma can fine a doctor in an abortion legal state for performing an abortion on a citizen of Oklahoma.

More likely, the abortion-friendly states will pull the usual theater of banning official travel to the non-murdery states, the NCAA will refuse to hold championship games in those states, etc. At least for a while. Or until AOC turns up in Florida again.
This member used to have another name, and the name that this member used to have was fistful.

dogmush

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,798

Can't wait to read Disney's corporate statement on this one.... >:D

WLJ

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 15,157
  • I am not a cat

Can't wait to read Disney's corporate statement on this one.... >:D

Mickey is getting an abortion

"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us".
- Calvin and Hobbes

AZRedhawk44

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,165

If this going to be the final decision from SCOTUS, I can see a whole lot of interstate travel rights cases in the future.

I.e. Oklahoma creates a law to ban citizens of Oklahoma from seeking an abortion from a state where it is legal or Oklahoma can fine a doctor in an abortion legal state for performing an abortion on a citizen of Oklahoma.


That would meddle with interstate commerce.

And honestly, that WOULD start getting to the phase of Handmaid's Tale, with border inspections and arrests of pregnant women.

I think the way to control it from the most "legal" way possible without running afoul of interstate commerce issues or going full-on Gilead or Taliban, is to ban insurance in your State from offering coverage of abortion procedures, while simultaneously outlawing the practice in your State entirely. 

Honestly I'm kind of surprised that medical fee schedules weren't consulted as a form of ad-hoc legitimacy of a particular procedure in this case, especially since Alito in particular was interested in any form of cultural tradition of abortion as a right, or local/regional/state laws that expressed favor or disapproval of the practice.  Aside from abortion, which has a slew of procedure codes (which I'm sure MillCreek can cite), another touchy and controversial medical procedure is euthanasia or physician assisted suicide.  Illegal most places, and shares a similar trait with abortion in that it isn't expressly listed as an illegal act... it falls under the general umbrella of homicide by means of arguing against a person's own agency.  It's a polar opposite, where in abortion the concern is about autonomy of the mother over the fetus vs the rights of the fetus, while euthanasia is about the autonomy of the patient and fitness of mind to make such a decision.

If insurance covers one of those, and no one is prosecuted for the act, then it is arguably legal in that particular State.

Isn't it Oregon that legalized euthanasia a few years ago?  Oregon fee schedules should have a CPT code for that procedure, then.  Or I guess it's possible that insurers consider it distasteful or don't offer it on their fee schedule contract even if it is legal.  But let's say it isn't legal in MillCreek's home of Washington.  There should be no CPT code for euthanasia for a Cigna fee schedule in Washington then, picking one insurer at random for example.  But there would be such a euthanasia CPT code in Oregon.

And at the final analysis, at the federal level:  There's no law banning abortion at the federal level, no felony charges or sentencing guidelines, etc.  Medicare and Medicaid have abortion listed as legitimate procedure codes for a doctor to perform and receive compensation from the government (granted there are Hyde amendment exemptions for compensation, but no criminality for the procedure itself).
"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."
--Lysander Spooner

I reject your authoritah!

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,838

If this going to be the final decision from SCOTUS, I can see a whole lot of interstate travel rights cases in the future.

I.e. Oklahoma creates a law to ban citizens of Oklahoma from seeking an abortion from a state where it is legal or Oklahoma can fine a doctor in an abortion legal state for performing an abortion on a citizen of Oklahoma.
Are there any historical precedents for that kind of law?

MillCreek

  • Skippy The Wonder Dog
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 18,185
  • APS Risk Manager

If SCOTUS finds there is no federal right to an abortion and leaves it up to the states, it will be interesting to see which states permit them and which forbid them.  I have already seen media that Oregon and Washington will permit, and I assume California will. 
_____________
Regards,
MillCreek
Snohomish County, WA  USA


Quote from: Angel Eyes on August 09, 2018, 01:56:15 AM
You are one lousy risk manager.

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39,214

If SCOTUS finds there is no federal right to an abortion and leaves it up to the states, it will be interesting to see which states permit them and which forbid them.  I have already seen media that Oregon and Washington will permit, and I assume California will.

Oregon already said something regarding both welcoming, and complaining about, Idaho women going to OR for abortions because of our new law here in ID (currently blocked by a court).
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

sumpnz

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,771

If SCOTUS finds there is no federal right to an abortion and leaves it up to the states, it will be interesting to see which states permit them and which forbid them.  I have already seen media that Oregon and Washington will permit, and I assume California will. 

The left coast, most of the northeastern states and IL, CO and probably a few others will probably go whole hog into abortion on demand up to (and likely for some time past) natural birth.  Most of fly-over country will ban it from the moment of conception, and some purple states will allow it up to some number of weeks or viability outside the womb. 

In the mean time expect a big push for a law prohibiting abortion restrictions to come out of DC.  We know Murky and Collins will vote for that.  Hard to say what Manchin, Tester and Sinema would do.  Moot point if the filibuster is retained for such matters, but I wouldn’t count on the Dems not nuking that.

Angel Eyes

  • Lying dog-faced pony soldier
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,543
  • You're not diggin'

The left coast, most of the northeastern states and IL, CO and probably a few others will probably go whole hog into abortion on demand up to (and likely for some time past) natural birth. 

Colorado's governor has been making noises about ensuring the legality of abortion in that state.

Re banning abortion restrictions at the Federal level:  pretty sure that wouldn't pass Constitutional muster.
"Tastes kind-of like cherry cough syrup and swimming-pool water, with a hint of puke."
                   - Paul Harrell describes Red Bull

Jim147

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,885

Murky and Collins have already written a bill. Chucky is trying to get it worked in with the one the house passed and get enough votes for it.

They knew this day was coming. They had over fifty years to do something.
Sometimes we carry more weight then we owe.
And sometimes goes on and on and on.

BAH-WEEP-GRAAAGHNAH WHEEP NI-NI BONG

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,241
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim

Are there any historical precedents for that kind of law?

Loving vs Virgina

Interracial marriage, Lovings were citizens of Virgina and got married outside Virgina and Virgina had laws on their books in regard to interracial marriage being illegal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

Quote
The Lovings were charged under Section 20-58 of the Virginia Code, which prohibited interracial couples from being married out of state and then returning to Virginia, and Section 20-59, which classified miscegenation as a felony, punishable by a prison sentence of between one and five years.
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

AZRedhawk44

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,165

Loving vs Virginia

Interracial marriage, Lovings were citizens of Virginia and got married outside Virginia and Virginia had laws on their books in regard to interracial marriage being illegal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

Anyone pulls that out as a precedent in favor of outlawing abortion and prosecuting interstate travelers is in for a BAD time.

That one also falls afoul of the full faith and credit practice, and interstate license compact.  Aside from using Jim Crow laws as your defense of your actions.
"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."
--Lysander Spooner

I reject your authoritah!

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,241
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim

I'll be curious how many people quit/boycott Amazon if the SCOTUS leek ends up being the final decision

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61301911
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,241
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim

Anyone pulls that out as a precedent in favor of outlawing abortion and prosecuting interstate travelers is in for a BAD time.

That one also falls afoul of the full faith and credit practice, and interstate license compact.  Aside from using Jim Crow laws as your defense of your actions.

Neither political fringe has never really thought through full ramifications of their actions at times.

Mulitple news agencies have reported repeatedly today that 68% of Americans favor some sort of legal abortions. (find your own salt)

I know, fringe for some people is where the weaving starts.  [popcorn]
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,838

Neither political fringe has never really thought through full ramifications of their actions at times.
My initial reaction to your post was to press X to doubt.

But as I thought it through, I could see some states passing that kind of law knowing full well it will be shot down on appeal, but that way they can be seen as doing something.

dogmush

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,798

Neither political fringe has never really thought through full ramifications of their actions at times.

Mulitple news agencies have reported repeatedly today that 68% of Americans favor some sort of legal abortions. (find your own salt)

I know, fringe for some people is where the weaving starts.  [popcorn]

I believe that.  I think that if you asked a bunch of Americans "Do you think Abortion should be legal in cases of incest, and where the mom's health is in danger?"  or some version of that 68% of folks would say yes.

I don't talk to a lot of folks about this, but outside of the Pro-Life absolutists, most people I see IRL and do discuss it with aren't particularly against the non surgical versions of abortions.  Those are up to what, 8 or 9 weeks? I know some folks are against them, and I'm not starting that argument, I'm just saying I could buy the 68% number.

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,241
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim

My initial reaction to your post was to press X to doubt.

But as I thought it through, I could see some states passing that kind of law knowing full well it will be shot down on appeal, but that way they can be seen as doing something.

Totes the goats.

I also ready know that if the leaked document matches the final decsion, you can add Iowa to the list of 100% ban on abortions and our Governor will run on that this fall on her reelection campaign. Same with any GOP state rep or senator incumbent/challenger.
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13