Over 30 Democrat Senators Call on Biden to Use ‘Full Force of the Federal Government’ to Undermine SCOTUS and Stop States From Restricting Abortion

[kjfreeze]

Any lefty Commies out there? Now just think about this for one minute... Let your mind soak in what these senators are wanting to do. And then consider how this is not insurrection and demands immediate loss of their rights as senators and are subject to be prosecuted for sedition and treason.

Our problem in American government is that no one is being held accountable for their actions and they go on promoting ideals that are illegal and unconstitutional. They ARE NOT holding to their sworn oath of office to uphold the Constitution. They ARE NOT representing the people that (for the most part) sent them there.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...mine-scotus-stop-states-restricting-abortion/

 

[NavigatorII]

I really only have one criticism of the ruling, and that is the timing of the release of the decision. Why you might ask? I don't trust John Roberts as far as I can throw him. Remember when he refused to conduct hearings on the legality of state legislatures being overruled by governors/AGs/state election officials regarding mail voting changes that were unconstitutional within each state's purview? His reason was the court did not want to interfere with elections. So with the Dimtards currently sinking into the abyss of national disfavor, he releases a controversial wedge issue just months before congressional midterms. I wonder how much he was paid or blackmailed to do this at this juncture? If you'll note, Roberts was lukewarm to overturning RVW and only wanted to rule on the Mississippi issue. Roberts voted against overturning Rowe v Wade.

 

[kjfreeze]

I really only have one criticism of the ruling, and that is the timing of the release of the decision. Why you might ask? I don't trust John Roberts as far as I can throw him. Remember when he refused to conduct hearings on the legality of state legislatures being overruled by governors/AGs/state election officials regarding mail voting changes that were unconstitutional within each state's purview? His reason was the court did not want to interfere with elections. So with the Dimtards currently sinking into the abyss of national disfavor, he releases a controversial wedge issue just months before congressional midterms. I wonder how much he was paid or blackmailed to do this at this juncture? If you'll note, Roberts was lukewarm to overturning RVW and only wanted to rule on the Mississippi issue. Roberts voted against overturning Rowe v Wade.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[goldmom]

In a 6-3 ruling I’m wondering how you say CJR voted against overturning RVW?
It was Kagan, Breyer, and Sotomayor.

 

[nail1988]

In a 6-3 ruling I’m wondering how you say CJR voted against overturning RVW?
It was Kagan, Breyer, and Sotomayor.

Roberts was a coward in his opinion and the 3 leftist descent was unhinged and fanned the flames of violence.

Chief Justice John Roberts, in a concurring opinion, said that he would have upheld Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban, but would have stopped short of overturning Roe and Casey, suggesting that such an action might construe justicial activism.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

Roberts was a coward in his opinion and the 3 leftist descent was unhinged and fanned the flames of violence.

Chief Justice John Roberts, in a concurring opinion, said that he would have upheld Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban, but would have stopped short of overturning Roe and Casey, suggesting that such an action might construe justicial activism.

Yep. The vote on Dobbs was 6-3, vote to overturn roe and casey was 5-4.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

I really only have one criticism of the ruling, and that is the timing of the release of the decision. Why you might ask? I don't trust John Roberts as far as I can throw him. Remember when he refused to conduct hearings on the legality of state legislatures being overruled by governors/AGs/state election officials regarding mail voting changes that were unconstitutional within each state's purview? His reason was the court did not want to interfere with elections. So with the Dimtards currently sinking into the abyss of national disfavor, he releases a controversial wedge issue just months before congressional midterms. I wonder how much he was paid or blackmailed to do this at this juncture? If you'll note, Roberts was lukewarm to overturning RVW and only wanted to rule on the Mississippi issue. Roberts voted against overturning Rowe v Wade.

So this will be interesting to watch. The thing about the abortion issue is it will be a MASSIVE fundraiser for all dems across the board.

And they really have nothing right now like it. So as much as these evil people crave power, they love money almost as much. I could see a scenario where they fail to do anything to challenge the ruling, because doing so kills their golden fundraising goose.

 

[jfegaly]

Once again, @goldmom supporting the moderate. Once again @goldmom not having all the facts. Shocked I tell ya. We should all just move on, because @goldmom says so.

SMDH

U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, ends constitutional right to abortion

The ruling hands a victory to Republicans and religious conservatives who want to limit or ban the procedure. Protesters gathered across the nation and President Biden said empowering states to ban abortion makes the U.S. an outlier among developed nations on protecting reproductive rights.

www.reuters.com

Yet another reason George W Bush is a huge POS Rino

 

[Dr. Curmudgeon]

Any lefty Commies out there? Now just think about this for one minute... Let your mind soak in what these senators are wanting to do. And then consider how this is not insurrection and demands immediate loss of their rights as senators and are subject to be prosecuted for sedition and treason.

Our problem in American government is that no one is being held accountable for their actions and they go on promoting ideals that are illegal and unconstitutional. They ARE NOT holding to their sworn oath of office to uphold the Constitution. They ARE NOT representing the people that (for the most part) sent them there.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...mine-scotus-stop-states-restricting-abortion/

Those 30 voices against the Supreme Court Ruling:

 

[goldmom]

CJR tries to play both ends against the middle and yes, it will earn him a well deserved ranking waaay far down the list of Chief Justices.
He may end up in an Urban Dictionary pictured next to the term wishy-washy.
Definitely not a man for his time.

 

[Dr. Curmudgeon]

I really only have one criticism of the ruling, and that is the timing of the release of the decision. Why you might ask? I don't trust John Roberts as far as I can throw him. Remember when he refused to conduct hearings on the legality of state legislatures being overruled by governors/AGs/state election officials regarding mail voting changes that were unconstitutional within each state's purview? His reason was the court did not want to interfere with elections. So with the Dimtards currently sinking into the abyss of national disfavor, he releases a controversial wedge issue just months before congressional midterms. I wonder how much he was paid or blackmailed to do this at this juncture? If you'll note, Roberts was lukewarm to overturning RVW and only wanted to rule on the Mississippi issue. Roberts voted against overturning Rowe v Wade.

Good point and that is the only way the Dims might get any support from younger voters. Most of the people that are unhinged about this topic are in liberal districts. I think the hope to flip some of those districts is probably not going to happen, but we'll see.

 

[NavigatorII]

In a 6-3 ruling I’m wondering how you say CJR voted against overturning RVW?
It was Kagan, Breyer, and Sotomayor.

Read it again. 6-3 in the Mississippi case. 5-4 in favor of overturning Roe V Wade.

Who Voted Against Roe v. Wade? How Each Supreme Court Justice Ruled on Overturning

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday voted to overturn landmark ruling Roe v. Wade, which provided constitutional protections for abortions across the nation for nearly 50 years, leaving power to the states.

www.nbcchicago.com

 

[Dr. Curmudgeon]

This will definitely galvanize both sides of the debate. If you are not able to choose a side then you are a weak person. This is easy: You either support abortion or you don't. Don't throw hypothetical issues in there, criminal rape victims will have an opportunity to take the day-after pill.

 

[FresnoGator]

I really only have one criticism of the ruling, and that is the timing of the release of the decision. Why you might ask? I don't trust John Roberts as far as I can throw him. Remember when he refused to conduct hearings on the legality of state legislatures being overruled by governors/AGs/state election officials regarding mail voting changes that were unconstitutional within each state's purview? His reason was the court did not want to interfere with elections. So with the Dimtards currently sinking into the abyss of national disfavor, he releases a controversial wedge issue just months before congressional midterms. I wonder how much he was paid or blackmailed to do this at this juncture? If you'll note, Roberts was lukewarm to overturning RVW and only wanted to rule on the Mississippi issue. Roberts voted against overturning Rowe v Wade.

Yep, it was to rally the dem base and put Biden's incompetence on the back burner. Pretty transparent ...

 

[FresnoGator]

This will definitely galvanize both sides of the debate. If you are not able to choose a side then you are a weak person. This is easy: You either support abortion or you don't. Don't throw hypothetical issues in there, criminal rape victims will have an opportunity to take the day-after pill.

Personally, this issue doesn't move the needle for me. I just don't care. Read or watch Freakonomics, the concept that the reduction in prison inmates and violent crime went down x amount of years after Roe v Wade was passed makes the left crazy, as if the 2 are unrelated. Good argument to keep it ...

 

[Timmer5]

Roberts was a coward in his opinion and the 3 leftist descent was unhinged and fanned the flames of violence.

Chief Justice John Roberts, in a concurring opinion, said that he would have upheld Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban, but would have stopped short of overturning Roe and Casey, suggesting that such an action might construe justicial activism.

Everyone knows Roberts isn’t a conservative. He’s the Rino of the court. He fooled George Bush. He hates Trump and never voted for anything in Trump’s favor. The SCOTUS sits at 5-4.

 

[instaGATOR]

What about the Socialist Rats and their version of democracy?

SCOTUS put the abortion question back to the people of each state to decide, right where it should have always been
.
If the majority in a state chose to abolish abortion, then that's democracy in action.

But apparently, they only like democracy when it's a Constitutional conservative that's being lynched....

 

[fatman76]

Everyone knows Roberts isn’t a conservative. He’s the Rino of the court. He fooled George Bush. He hates Trump and never voted for anything in Trump’s favor. The SCOTUS sits at 5-4.

No he didn’t, the Bush and Cheney dynasties are the ultimate RINO’s.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

No he didn’t, the Bush and Cheney dynasties are the ultimate RINO’s.

You stole my response. Roberts and Dubya were definitely on the same team.

Along with the clintons and obamas.

 

[Orangeclad]

Robert's upholding of Obamacare on tortured logic still pisses me off to this day. Scalia and Kennedy were both pissed and Roberts was a hero to the left that day.

 

[Capt Ron 1]

This will definitely galvanize both sides of the debate. If you are not able to choose a side then you are a weak person. This is easy: You either support abortion or you don't. Don't throw hypothetical issues in there, criminal rape victims will have an opportunity to take the day-after pill.

I usually see things close to you, but here I do not. I do not think it is as simple as you say. I am a Christian, but do not believe it is my right to force my Christian beliefs on others. Luckily, I never had to make a decision here when it comes to abortion, but am pretty sure I would not have aborted a baby. Why I 100% support overturning R vs W is because it was 100% unconstitutional. I LOVE taking power AWAY from the Federal Government...and giving it to the States. That is how our Country is SUPPOSED to work. KLibs HATE that. Yes, this will lose us some mid term races...even as our Great Nation is disintegrating before our eyes...but I will concede that, to get our Constitution cleaned up...and it seems like that is the mission of the SC right now.

 

[Dr. Curmudgeon]

I usually see things close to you, but here I do not. I do not think it is as simple as you say. I am a Christian, but do not believe it is my right to force my Christian beliefs on others. Luckily, I never had to make a decision here when it comes to abortion, but am pretty sure I would not have aborted a baby. Why I 100% support overturning R vs W is because it was 100% unconstitutional. I LOVE taking power AWAY from the Federal Government...and giving it to the States. That is how our Country is SUPPOSED to work. KLibs HATE that. Yes, this will lose us some mid term races...even as our Great Nation is disintegrating before our eyes...but I will concede that, to get our Constitution cleaned up...and it seems like that is the mission of the SC right now.

No, it is not forcing anything. It is recognizing the difference between right and wrong. Either you allow evil or you stand against it. Abortion used as you would a condom is wrong.

 

[Capt Ron 1]

No, it is not forcing anything. It is recognizing the difference between right and wrong. Either you allow evil or you stand against it. Abortion used as you would a condom is wrong.

I just do not see it that way...and my point was you CAN see it differently than you do. Even though I would make my personal decision exactly how you would...I just do not think it is upon my rights to force others to feel like I do.

 

[Dr. Curmudgeon]

I just do not see it that way...and my point was you CAN see it differently than you do. Even though I would make my personal decision exactly how you would...I just do not think it is upon my rights to force others to feel like I do.

That is your free will. I do know that sex outside of marriage has been treated as cavalier as going to the movies on a date. I would hope that if anything this forces more responsibility for actions and makes one think twice about having sex with a partner they do not love or respect enough to raise a child with.

 

[BCSpell]

Basic Constitutional Law. The Congress creates laws/legislation, NOT the SCOTUS or the POTUS. Roe v Wade was basically the SCOTUS creating Federal Law. If all these Dims want a Federal Abortion Law, then gather support, and create and pass the law.

 

[Capt Ron 1]

That is your free will. I do know that sex outside of marriage has been treated as cavalier as going to the movies on a date. I would hope that if anything this forces more responsibility for actions and makes one think twice about having sex with a partner they do not love or respect enough to raise a child with.

Hey Doc...I do not agree with you, however I do respect your opinion...and have no problem with it.

 

[BCSpell]

Hey Doc...I do not agree with you, however I do respect your opinion...and have no problem with it.

OR women can figure out some other form of birth control, other then killing unwanted babies.

 

[instaGATOR]

Basic Constitutional Law. The Congress creates laws/legislation, NOT the SCOTUS or the POTUS. Roe v Wade was basically the SCOTUS creating Federal Law. If all these Dims want a Federal Abortion Law, then gather support, and create and pass the law.

There is no authority for the Federal Govt. to be creating any laws on abortion.
Show me in the Constitution where it puts abortion in the Fed's purview???

The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, a part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791.[1] It expresses the principle of federalism, also known as states' rights, by stating that the federal government has only those powers delegated to it by the Constitution, and that all other powers not forbidden to the states by the Constitution are reserved to each state.

 

[JimGaster]

Leftists hate America. Leftists hate freedom. Leftists are mortally corrupt!

 

[BCSpell]

There is no authority for the Federal Govt. to be creating any laws on abortion.
Show me in the Constitution where it puts abortion in the Fed's purview???

The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, a part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791.[1] It expresses the principle of federalism, also known as states' rights, by stating that the federal government has only those powers delegated to it by the Constitution, and that all other powers not forbidden to the states by the Constitution are reserved to each state.

They could definitely pass a law, but the real questions is, would someone challenge it all the way to the SCOTUS and would SCOTUS rule it unconstitional. Congress has passed many laws using the Commerce Clause or the restriction thereof as a basis. It becomes law until and if Congress passes another law changing it or the SCOTUS over turns it for being unconstitutional.

 

[Dr. Curmudgeon]

Hey Doc...I do not agree with you, however I do respect your opinion...and have no problem with it.

Well, I look at sin as sin. I feel that if I rationalize sin then I am okaying that behavior. As a Christian I can not distinguish between transgressions just hope that we realize we must ask for forgiveness of sins before we can truly be forgiven. To act as though we are saved regardless of our actions after the sacrifice is not trusting and obeying the new covenant. And I mean this with love for fellow man, otherwise, I wouldn't care to mention it. I also respect your opinions and understand we don't always have to agree. I made this point known to Greg Gutfeld about a month ago on Twitter.

 

[instaGATOR]

They could definitely pass a law, but the real questions is, would someone challenge it all the way to the SCOTUS and would SCOTUS rule it unconstitional. Congress has passed many laws using the Commerce Clause or the restriction thereof as a basis. It becomes law until and if Congress passes another law changing it or the SCOTUS over turns it for being unconstitutional.

So, you agree that abortion does not come under the purview of the federal government, but that doesn't prevent those that violate their 'Oath of Office' (traitors) from attempting to circumvent the Constitution anyway... 😠

I sure hope that you weren't expecting me to be surprised by this.... 🤓

 

[Gator Fever]

Basic Constitutional Law. The Congress creates laws/legislation, NOT the SCOTUS or the POTUS. Roe v Wade was basically the SCOTUS creating Federal Law. If all these Dims want a Federal Abortion Law, then gather support, and create and pass the law.

I don't think a federal law forced on the states would be constitutional.

 

[BCSpell]

I don't think a federal law forced on the states would be constitutional.

More likely than not, it would be over turned as unconstitutional, BUT, by the time a case got to the SCOTUS, the make up of the Court could be very different.

 

[Dr. Curmudgeon]

More likely than not, it would be over turned as unconstitutional, BUT, by the time a case got to the SCOTUS, the make up of the Court could be very different.

Yeah, they'll get the Arkancide Crew working on removing the people that voted to overturn it.

 

[park_mike]

Hey Doc...I do not agree with you, however I do respect your opinion...and have no problem with it.

Capt Ron, I am interested in your perspective. I agree that the role of government is not to force morality on anyone. That is a really bad idea since the source of morality can change with the make up of the demographic. However, as a Christian, how do you see abortion? Is it morally wrong to you but you don't think it is your purview to force your morality on another or do you think it is potentially not immoral because you are unsure of where to find life begins, or at least protected life?

 

[Capt Ron 1]

I don't think a federal law forced on the states would be constitutional.

EXACTLY what R vs W did...and it was NOT

 

[Capt Ron 1]

Capt Ron, I am interested in your perspective. I agree that the role of government is not to force morality on anyone. That is a really bad idea since the source of morality can change with the make up of the demographic. However, as a Christian, how do you see abortion? Is it morally wrong to you but you don't think it is your purview to force your morality on another or do you think it is potentially not immoral because you are unsure of where to find life begins, or at least protected life?

Good question. For myself, I would never have an abortion. My point is, I do not think it is the Federal Governments job to force any religion on someone that does not believe...even though I do. I am a constitutionalist, and my gripe w R vs W was that it 100% WAS unconstitutional. I actually agree with the Doc personally...but my love for this Country will not let me force my views on others that are allowed to have those other views. I also do not believe in making US help pay for people to get abortions. These commie libs are tring to spend federal money for transportation across state lines..and I WHOLEHEARTEDLY not only disagree with it..it REALL pisses me off.

 

[Capt Ron 1]

Capt Ron, I am interested in your perspective. I agree that the role of government is not to force morality on anyone. That is a really bad idea since the source of morality can change with the make up of the demographic. However, as a Christian, how do you see abortion? Is it morally wrong to you but you don't think it is your purview to force your morality on another or do you think it is potentially not immoral because you are unsure of where to find life begins, or at least protected life?

To ME life begins at conception. I think that anyone who aborts a fetus will have to answer for it one day to God.

 

[instaGATOR]

RvW was just the beginning of the many things that the Feds have over-stepped their Constitutional granted authority on.

We need to continue to take back everything that's for the states or the Sovereign Citizens to decide on, and make laws on.

Like with the graduated/progressive income tax on the Sovereign Citizen's wages.
Like with education.
Like with medicine.
Like with,,, fill in the many blanks....