General Discussion

NullTuples

(6,017 posts)

32. It's worse than ruling on the Constitutionality of that law

Sun Sep 5, 2021, 05:36 PM

Sep 2021

Shadow docketing discriminatory election laws was just a test run.

What they did with SB8 was assist the Texas Legislature (+ Governor) in creating a new form of law in America.

One which this court claims is outside their purview.

...and therefore not subject to their judicial checks and balances at this time.

They've also blessed the creation of vigilantes, and horribly unbalanced laws.

While leaving the question of Constitutionality completely untouched.

By doing so, they've left intact that the law - for now - is *assumed* constitutional.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

40 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Misinformation alert... SCOTUS did NOT rule on Constitutionality of TX law. [View all] WarGamer Sep 2021 OP

Thank's for the clarity! Kittycatkat Sep 2021 #1

Half the clickbait merchants are spreading misinfo to create outrage. WarGamer Sep 2021 #2

Thanks for the confirmation which I sincerely believed ..... Lovie777 Sep 2021 #3

The cake is still in the oven... WarGamer Sep 2021 #4

tbh By that standard, the cake will remain in the oven. Forever. tbh LanternWaste Sep 2021 #36

To repeat... WarGamer Sep 2021 #37

Analysis: Supreme Court signals Roe vs. Wade will fall after allowing Texas to ban most abortions. andym Sep 2021 #5

right. there's a certain amount of pussyfoot here stopdiggin Sep 2021 #8

Other Avenues Possible DallasNE Sep 2021 #26

Justice Sotomayor was pretty worked up about it too Danascot Sep 2021 #28

Also this Danascot Sep 2021 #35

you're correct stopdiggin Sep 2021 #6

When in the last 50 years do you suppose Democrats had the votes in Congress to codify abortion tritsofme Sep 2021 #7

you're also correct stopdiggin Sep 2021 #9

Democrats have had majorities, but not necessarily pro-choice ones, not even today. tritsofme Sep 2021 #13

In the House we do today dsc Sep 2021 #27

that depends A LOT on what you call stopdiggin Sep 2021 #38

Screw That Get Angry nvme Sep 2021 #10

In Texas... carpetbagger Sep 2021 #15

Yes, but it's still friggin' outrageous they let this monstrosity stand and it seems likely the LymphocyteLover Sep 2021 #11

What are you trying to do, Mr.Bill Sep 2021 #12

The truth is not a good a story. Besides, people don't seem to demand the truth. Hoyt Sep 2021 #14

Who doesn't already know what you posted? SharonClark Sep 2021 #16

Yea, I'm gonna go with Sotomayor. Treefrog Sep 2021 #30

So many people think they ended it because effectively that's what they did kcr Sep 2021 #17

Exactly. SharonClark Sep 2021 #18

Yep berniesandersmittens Sep 2021 #20

They did not overturn Roe v. Wade, but they did allow the Texas law to effectively end abortion Lonestarblue Sep 2021 #19

Well, if we're insisting on punctilious accuracy dpibel Sep 2021 #21

**"In reaching this conclusion," the opinion said, elleng Sep 2021 #22

Clarity & reading comprehension matter! CaptainTruth Sep 2021 #23

Woong In One Regard DallasNE Sep 2021 #24

Shush shush, pat pat, don't get all paranoid at all that chipping away, chippies. ancianita Sep 2021 #25

They allowed harms to continue under the law, pending years of litigation RandomNumbers Sep 2021 #29

Honestly this is a bit disingenuous dsc Sep 2021 #31

It's worse than ruling on the Constitutionality of that law NullTuples Sep 2021 #32

There was a podcast on the local news radio station here a few days ago BumRushDaShow Sep 2021 #33

What the court did is unconscionable. themaguffin Sep 2021 #34

This message was self-deleted by its author dalton99a Sep 2021 #39

K&R UTUSN Sep 2021 #40