Next: Griswold v. Connecticut

[Scottie Mom]

1965: Privacy = a Constitutional right. Issue of the case was the right of married couples to obtain birth control. Connecticut prohibited this. SCOTUS said the use of birth control was a privacy right.

IMO, Griswold is next to fall.

[onecaliberal]

1. I think so too.

[Scottie Mom]

3. Yep. The right of privacy -- from that basis came Roe and Gay Marriage. Roe fell and IMO gay marriage

is next!

[onecaliberal]

4. They're already doing it in many states.

[Scrivener7]

2. Yep.

[JudyM]

5. Obergefell. That contingent is far more frothy about gay marriage than contraception.

I hope it’ll be contraception because that’ll get more attention to rethug lunacy, and it certainly will not stand. Obergefell is more vulnerable.

[Scottie Mom]

7. Griswold -- Privacy is a constitutional right.

Decriminalization of consenting gay sex and the right to enter into a same sex marriage all came from the right of privacy being recognized in Griswold. So did Roe.

[JudyM]

9. I know Griswold was a basis, but they're more interested in getting rid of gay rights than

contraception.

[Scottie Mom]

10. That's not the issue. It's the fact that the right of privacy was recognized.

The right of privacy underpins many, many things. Reproductive rights (like birth control and abortion) and the rights of those who are gay, bi, trans (like same sex marriage). It’s not that one thing is more important — it’s all based on legislating morality.

[JudyM]

11. I do understand that, I'm simply reflecting on the purely tactical issue, not the legal underpinning

issue. Yes, if they successfully go after Griswold, other dominoes will fall. However, gay marriage is a far more highly energizing issue to conservatives and their sheep than is contraception…

[Scottie Mom]

13. Same sex marriage and abortion.

I agree that energizes the RWs totally.

Interesting thought: Are they willing to give up birth control?

[JudyM]

19. Exactly my point, Scottie Mom: they are not as likely to go after contraception as LGBT rights.

My bet is that they’ll go after Obergefell (marriage) and then Lawrence v Texas (same-sex sexual activities), not necessarily in that order, but before Griswold. I think Griswold’s public support is too much of a risk. They can in the process of knocking down Obergefell or Lawrence, overturn Griswold. I just can’t see anyone pushing Griswold, itself, up to the Supremes.

[RobinA]

24. Dobbs In Its Current

incarnation doesn't really mention privacy, unless it's buried in the last 10 pages I skimmed. It pretty narrowly focuses on the many "problems" of Roe and Casey. That could be a good thing. Well, it could be a somewhat less bad thing when it comes to some of the related cases.

[Celerity]

20. this

[TomSlick]

6. Agreed.

Roe is based on Griswold. If Roe was wrongly decided, then so was Griswold.

God help us.

[Scottie Mom]

8. Exactly.

Same sex marriage, birth control...now all at risk of falling like Roe.

[ChoppinBroccoli]

12. Obergefell, Loving, And Griswold (I'm Not Sure In What Order)

These are the cases they'll go after next. They won't stop until only white heterosexuals can marry and women have no rights. That's what they consider "the good old days."

Now, if State legislators were smart, they'd respond by passing bills precipitously raising the amount of money allocated to caring for underprivileged and/or abandoned children, along with a corresponding tax increase to pay for it. Then let everyone know that their taxes will be going up, probably by a lot, to help care for all these unwanted children you're forcing people to have. Then we'll see who's REALLY pro-life.

If I could figure out a way to make ONLY the pro-lifers pay for it, I would. I would also start showing up on the doorsteps of pro-lifers' houses with unwanted babies and saying, "Here you go." But I haven't figured out a way to make that happen.............yet.

[roamer65]

15. Obergefell is next, then Loving and finally Griswold.

They hate us gays having rights to marry the most.

[scipan]

23. So ironic that there is a black/white marriage on SCOTUS

I don't think Loving will fall as long as Clarence is still there.

[JudyM]

21. Obergefell or Lawrence v Texas will be their next target. Both could be gutted in one opinion.

[G_j]

14. that's the idea

[leftstreet]

16. Why hasn't Congress told the SC to fuck off?

They can end the filibuster and codify Roe into law.

Link to tweet

?s=20&t=xFOwY4aEs1VJkO_zZCkBSg

[Scottie Mom]

17. Yes!

Why the hell are women AGAIN second class citizens. 🤬🤬🤬

[tritsofme]

18. Is there a serious movement in red states to ban contraceptives?

It might be where some of the nutjobs turn next, but I haven’t seen much chatter about this.

[SoonerPride]

25. Yes. The right calls them abortifacients

which is a lie.

but yes they will ban contraceptives.

[intheflow]

22. 100% this!

They won't be happy until all citizen sexuality is closeted, taped and bound to a chair. Look out Women! Look out LGBTQ+ communities! Look out library records! After that's accomplished, they'll rewrite the 2nd amendment to "clarify" only white people can legally have firearms. To be announced with a gigantic sale on lynching rope.