On 5/3/2022 3:13 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>> Politico is reporting that they have come into possession of a leaked copy of
>>> Alito's majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, which indicates
>>> the Court has five votes to overturn Roe and Casey.
>
>>> If it's a legitimate copy of the opinion, this leak is nothing short
>>> of breathtaking. It would constitute one of the greatest breaches
>>> of security in the history of the Supreme Court and represents the
>>> greatest crisis that Chief Justice Roberts has faced in his tenure
>>> on the Court. It is a breach of the most fundamental obligations and
>>> traditions of the Court.
>
>>> It is also hard not to view this as a malicious act. What is the
>>> motivation for leaking the decision? The only intent of such an act
>>> is to trigger a response from outside of the Court. The most likely
>>> motivation is obviously to pressure justices to change their votes and
>>> push the legislation in Congress on a federal abortion law before the
>>> midterm elections. It will also likely renew the call for court packing.
>
>> That's stunning. . . .
>
> Roberts confirmed the leak this morning, 5/3/2022.
>
> I've been listening to various professors discuss what could happen if
> this is indeed the final opinion, although no one with expertise
> discussed the fact that all sexual privacy issues in federal judicial
> opinions are based on the notion that sexual privacy is an unenumerated
> right in the Ninth Amendment, plus other parts of the Constitution.
>
> This includes state law regulating or restricting contraceptive use,
> re-defining morning after pills (which prevents the pregnancy from
> beginning after conception has occurred) as an abortificant, anti-sodomy
> law, and of course gay marriage.
>
> If you want your state legislature in your marital bed, then you want
> Roe v. Wade overturned. Don't kid yourself, this will not stop with
> abortion restrictions.
>
> Anyway, I had to turn off one female professor who said "women or
> persons with uteruses".

Because it's 'uteri'?

> moviePig has already won.

Feeding on your own shit, though cost-saving, isn't good for you, Adam.