* You already know this…
The Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO.
The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes.
“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” he writes in the document, labeled as the “Opinion of the Court.” “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
The full draft opinion is here.
* But it may not end there…
* As I write this at 1:15 am, I’ve not yet seen nor received any react from Richard Irvin’s campaign (including his staunchly pro-life running mate), Darren Bailey, Gary Rabine or the ILGOP. There’s nothing on Illinois Review or the Illinois Family Institute’s Facebook page.
But Jesse Sullivan tweeted this…
Mary Miller kinda danced around it…
Nothing yet from Rodney Davis [see below for statement].
* Tribune…
Amy Gehrke, the executive director of Illinois Right to Life, said she had just learned of the Politico report minutes before receiving a call from a Tribune reporter.
”My initial reaction is that this is absolutely despicable and shows that abortion activists will stop at absolutely nothing to protect Roe v. Wade,” Gehrke said.
“A decision that has been incredibly harmful to women and has led to deaths of 10s of millions of pre-born babies since 1973,” she said. ”I saw it on the news and instantly my phone started blowing up.”
Gehrke also noted the preliminary nature of such a document, wondering how the situation would ultimately play out.
* Lacking much Republican response, let’s turn to pro-choice groups and Democrats. First, Gov. Pritzker…
* And…
Daily Public Schedule: Tuesday, May 3, 2022
What: Governor Pritzker and legislators to speak on the reported Supreme Court overturning of Roe v. Wade.
Where: James Randolph Thompson Center, Blue Room, 15th floor, Chicago IL
When: 8:30 am
Watch: www.illinois.gov/livevideo
* And…
* Mayor Lightfoot…
Tonight, I join the chorus of millions of people nationwide who are sickened and enraged to learn that the Supreme Court has seemingly voted to strike down Roe v. Wade. This landmark decision has paved the way for women in need of reproductive care to access safe abortions for decades and importantly, decide for themselves the circumstances under which they chose to bear children. If this draft opinion becomes the law of the land, women and their families will suffer, needlessly.
And make no mistake, this decision will reverse the gains that women have made in the workplace and in every other aspect of their lives since the Court first decided Roe. Also, the architects of this destruction will not stop at a woman’s right to choose. The Court’s draft opinion will establish a precedent for gutting the legal underpinnings used to protect against gender-based discrimination overall including women’s rights, trans rights, immigrant rights, and of course, the right to same-sex and interracial marriage. This decision truly epitomizes the dangers that exist at the intersection of racism and sexism.
This Court truly does not care about settled legal precedent or its legitimacy as an independent body. The zeal with which Alito writes on behalf of the majority about the end of Roe leaves no doubt that the right-wing majority cares more about politics than the law. For shame.
I also want to speak directly to those who are feeling the real-world impacts of these seismic shifts. We see you and we want you to know that your rights, your circumstances, and your choices matter. Chicago will continue to be a haven for those seeking access to the full range of safe reproductive care. We will also continue to fight in Chicago to protect the right to choose and will not stop fighting to protect this right in our surrounding counties and states. Do not let this setback be a lasting defeat. People of goodwill still have the most important tool in our democracy — the right to vote. We will and we must vote them out.
* Planned Parenthood…
* Personal PAC…
* DPI Chair and US Rep. Kelly…
* US Rep. Schakowsky…
* Lt. Gov. Stratton…
* Casten…
* Newman…
* Valencia…
Democratic Secretary of State candidate Anna Valencia tonight released the following statement after a news report of a draft U.S. Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade was leaked:
“If the final Supreme Court decision looks anything like this draft, it will be devastating for women across the country. We knew this was a possibility when Donald Trump was elected President and filled three vacancies on the Court. That’s why I spoke out back then in favor of HB 40, which ensures Illinois women maintain their reproductive rights, regardless of what the Supreme court says.
“At this frightening and dangerous time, we need elected leaders in Illinois and across the country who have always protected and advanced reproductive freedom. I will always use my platform to fight to protect women’s access to abortion. The fight ahead will be a difficult one, and I remain unwavering in my commitment to defend that fundamental right.”
Valencia has long been an outspoken supporter of reproductive rights, and she has consistently and exclusively supported pro-choice candidates running for office in Illinois. Valencia spoke out in favor of HB 40 and sponsored a resolution in the Chicago City Council urging its passage. That bill repealed the Illinois “trigger” law that would have made abortion illegal in Illinois if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns or weakens Roe v. Wade. Valencia is the only candidate in the Illinois Secretary of State race to be endorsed by Planned Parenthood of Illinois Action.
* Oof…
* Raja…
Tonight, Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi issued the following statement in response to an initial draft majority opinion written by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito that would overturn Roe v. Wade and the subsequent 1992 decision Planned Parenthood v. Casey:
“For nearly half a century, the right to choose has been a fundamental, sacred right protected by the Constitution. This evening’s leaked draft of the Supreme Court majority opinion reveals the final blow they plan to deliver to this sacred right by overturning Roe v. Wade. While this is only a draft opinion, it is also a warning of the grim reality that may befall our nation for all who ever believed that the right to make reproductive decisions should fall to individual women, not Congress, the President, nor Supreme Court Justices who will never have to live a day in their shoes.
In the days and weeks ahead, I will join my colleagues in Congress and Americans across the country in speaking out for reproductive rights, defending them in legislative chambers, court rooms, and on street corners across our nation. While many of the consequences of this draft decision remain in doubt, there must be no doubt of the commitment of so many of us to ensuring that access to safe, affordable reproductive health care will survive – if not through the ruling of our highest court, then through the dedicated efforts of individual Americans.”
* Preckwinkle..
* Delia Ramirez…
I am devastated and enraged about the Supreme Court’s draft opinion to overturn Roe Vs. Wade. Reproductive rights are under attack like never before. Let’s be clear that this decision it’s outrageous and unprecedented, but it is not final. We cannot sit back and watch, we must act with our votes and our voices. This is an attack on everyone’s reproductive freedoms but it is specifically harmful to poor, Black and Brown women and transgendered people.
Illinois has led in protecting abortion and reproductive rights.This is precisely why I co-sponsored and helped pass the Reproductive Health Act in 2019, to guarantee the right to abortion for anyone in Illinois. We took abortion rights seriously and were proactive anticipating the draft decision we are witnessing today. Because of our work, Illinois is now a safe place for reproductive health care. In Congress, I will fight to codify abortion rights as health care. If the courts won’t protect women, it’s time for Congress to act and codify Roe v. Wade into law. Today, we mourn this awful decision, tomorrow we organize!
* Nikki Budzinski…
Nikki Budzinski made the following statement: “I’m horrified and deeply saddened by the leaked US Supreme Court’s decision that shreds decades of progress for women in this country and our reproductive freedom.
My heart goes out to all the women who fearlessly fought for their right to keep government outside of our doctor appointments. To all the women who lost their lives because they didn’t have the right to a safe, legal abortion. And to all the American women who are scared right now because our rights are no longer protected.
Today’s news is a reminder that our freedom is never guaranteed. We have to fight for our reproductive freedom and the stakes have never been higher. That’s why we can’t sit on the sidelines and this election cycle.
I pledge to stand for our reproductive rights and I will never back down. Join me.”
* EMILY’s List…
Today a leaked draft of the U.S. Supreme Court’s initial majority opinion for Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization revealed a decision to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade precedent. Laphonza Butler, president of EMILY’s List, released the following statement in response:
“It’s no surprise that the leaked draft of the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization shows that the Supreme Court plans to fully overturn the landmark precedent in Roe v. Wade. For years, anti-choice politicians have worked overtime to strip away our fundamental rights and give government control of critical health care decisions. They are working to ban abortion, full stop. This was the plan all along.
“It’s past time to vote out every official who stands against the pro-choice majority. At EMILY’s List, we will fight harder than ever to make them pay, by electing more Democratic pro-choice women at all levels of government who will protect our rights and ensure that our abortion rights do not depend on our zip code or our financial situation. And we will work to vote every one of them out.”
* Related…
* 4 things we know, and one big thing we don’t, about the draft opinion overruling Roe v. Wade: While it is very likely that this opinion is an authentic draft, authored by Samuel Alito and leaked by some internal Court source to the press, there is one big thing that we do not yet know about this opinion: Whether it will bear any resemblance to the final decision that the Court is expected to release by late June.
* The original Roe v. Wade decision also was leaked to the press
…Adding… Personal PAC…
Pro-choice voters in Illinois cannot allow Illinois’ richest person and right-wing super donor, Ken Griffin, to buy the 2022 elections with his hand-picked anti-choice extremist candidates for the Illinois Supreme Court, Governor, Attorney General and Illinois General Assembly.
Personal PAC will make certain every pro-choice voter in Illinois will know the truth about these anti-democracy, right-wing candidates who will stop at nothing to rob women of their basic human right to make their own personal decisions about abortion and birth control. There are 22 bills sitting in the Illinois General Assembly today, and pending Illinois court challenges by anti-choice leaders, that would return Illinois to the darkest days of life-threatening illegal abortion, all just waiting for one bad election result. We must ensure 2022 is not that election.
* Rep. Croke…
Today, State Representative Margaret Croke released the following statement in response to reports that the Supreme Court has voted to overturn Roe vs. Wade:
“Reports that the Supreme Court has voted to overturn Roe vs. Wade are devastating. Women will die if Roe vs. Wade is overturned – women who are forced to give birth knowing it will kill them, women who will seek abortions in back alleys, and more. In the state legislature, I’ve voted to ensure Illinois will remain the most pro-choice state in the country regardless of the Supreme Court’s decision, but millions of women live in states where legislators have already put laws in place to rip away their right to choose the second the Court’s ruling is official. I am terrified that I will be bringing my baby girl into a world where she has fewer rights than her grandmother once had, but I’m committed to fighting like hell to protect this fundamental freedom.”
* Planned Parenthood Illinois…
Statement attributed to Jennifer Welch, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Illinois:
“Planned Parenthood of Illinois is furious that the Supreme Court is prepared to ignore half a century of settled law and end the constitutional right to an abortion by overturning Roe v. Wade. But it’s also not a surprise. We have been preparing for this decision for years, and we will continue to ensure that every patient, no matter where they live, has access to the health care they need and deserve.
We are proud to say that abortion is still safe and legal in Illinois.
This is a devastating blow for the millions of people who will suddenly find themselves in an abortion desert; facing a daunting dilemma - travel hundreds of miles to access an abortion, seek an illegal alternative or carry a pregnancy to term against their will. We will continue to fight so that everyone can access the fundamental reproductive health care they need and deserve — no matter what.”
* DPI…
Democratic Party of Illinois Chair Rep. Robin Kelly released the following statement regarding the leaked draft opinion from the United States Supreme Court, appearing to overturn abortion rights:
“If these reports are true, this outrageous Supreme Court decision would strike a devastating blow against women’s fundamental right to choose what’s best for their own bodies. I am appalled and furious at the hateful dismissiveness of established precedent mixed with the gleeful excitement from Republicans as they prepare to roll back the clock on the rights of women in our country and continue their systemic fight to take away individual freedoms.
“Illinois Democrats have made significant progress in expanding women’s reproductive rights in our state, but clearly this fight is long from over. We will continue to do everything in our power to protect the right to choose from Illinois Republicans dead-set on following the extremist playbook from their colleagues in states like Missouri, Kentucky, and Texas. With seats on Illinois’ Supreme Court on the ballot this November, along with statewide office holders, federal representatives, and our state legislature, the difference between Democrats and Republicans, and our work ahead, could not be clearer.
“To those who feel under attack right now, know that you are not alone. Illinois Democrats at every level will never stop fighting to protect your rights, your healthcare, and your voice. Never.”
* Rabine in Crain’s…
“The Democrats’ hysteria over what it contains should be focused on why was it leaked,” said another GOP contender in a statement, Gary Rabine. “But not unexpected from the party that has no respect for the rule of law. That said, I have always been pro-life and believe the legal reasoning of Roe is tortured at best. If this comes to pass it is a victory for conservatives all over the country.”
* Sen. Sara Feigenholtz (D-Chicago) writing in Crain’s…
This is not the time to pull the covers over your head and think it will go away. The anti-abortion movement never gave up, and neither will we.
The remedy is sitting in the U.S. Congress. The Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA) was written to enshrine into law reproductive health care across America and is waiting for a vote in the Senate. The time to act is now before the final decision is rendered by the Supreme Court.
Note to U.S. Senate: Go back to Washington, end the filibuster, and pass the WHPA with 50 votes.
Our future depends on it.
The clock is ticking.
* Another statement from Rabine…
Although it is just a draft opinion, it appears that the United States Supreme Court is about to reverse Roe V. Wade. which has allowed for the murder of thousands of unborn children. I am unapologetically pro-life, and I welcome the court’s reversal of this long-standing precedent. We must, as a state and a country, do all we can to protect the rights of the unborn.
* Rodney Davis…
U.S. Representative Rodney Davis (R-IL) released the following statement after news reports of a draft U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) opinion striking down the Roe v. Wade abortion decision was leaked:
“As a Pro-Life lawmaker, I’ve long advocated for an end to the ‘Roe’ decision. It was wrong from the beginning, and I hope the Court’s pending decision empowers states to enact pro-Life laws and protect the unborn.
“I am deeply concerned by the fact this draft opinion was leaked. This is nothing more than an attempt to intimidate the justices on this case and sway their opinion. A leak of this magnitude must be condemned and, if warranted, investigated and prosecuted. Those on the Left who are cheering this lawless type of behavior are contributing to the undermining of our Nation’s institutions and civic processes. Please pray for the safety of the justices on our Supreme Court.
“Democrats will use this moment to continue their push for a radical, pro-abortion agenda that’s far outside the mainstream. They are advocating for late-term and taxpayer-funded abortion, limits on parental involvement, restrictions on conscience objections, and more – nationwide, in all fifty states. Their extreme pro-abortion agenda is appalling and wrong. I will continue to oppose them every step of the way.”
* Eastern Bloc member Rep. Niemerg…
State Representative Adam Niemerg (R-Dieterich) is issuing the following statement on the Supreme Court’s apparent ruling to overturn Roe v Wade.
“This is a leaked ruling, which is unprecedented. However, if true this ruling is certainly a monumental one for our nation.
It is in my mind a call to action for every pro-life voter in Illinois to elect pro-life legislators and ensure we have a pro-life Governor. Thanks to far-left politicians, Illinois has a law in place ensuring our state’s extreme pro-abortion laws will remain untouched in the event Roe v Wade is overturned.
We can change the law in Illinois, but we need pro-life voters to get involved in electing pro-life legislators now more than ever. The Supreme Court ruling represents a significant opportunity to save the lives of countless unborn babies, but the real work is only just beginning. I urge every pro-life voter to stand up and let their vote be heard.”
* Pat Dowell…
Pat Dowell, IL 1st CD Candidate on the Threat to Roe v Wade
A draft of a U.S. Supreme Court opinion was leaked, which, if true, would overturn Roe v Wade.
Right now, women across the country are receiving lifesaving medical care because of Roe v. Wade.
As a mother, I know the tough choices women make every day for their families. I believe healthcare decisions should be made between a medical provider and their patient. And I believe in the right to privacy codified in the Fourth Amendment. For all of these reasons, I am proudly pro-choice.
In Congress, I promise to protect the freedom to choose. HR3755 and S1975 (the Women’s Health Protection Act, sponsored by Rep. Judy Chu and Senator Richard Blumenthal) cannot wait - and neither can we. The Senate should #EndTheFilibuster and vote. Now. If Roe is overturned, it is the beginning of eliminating civil rights for all of us.” said Ald. Pat Dowell, candidate for the Democratic nomination for Illinois’ 1st Congressional District.
* Swain…
The following is a statement from First Congressional District candidate Jonathan T. Swain on reports that the U.S. Supreme Court intends to overturn Roe V Wade.
CHICAGO, IL - A woman’s right to choose what’s best for her body is sacrosanct. I stand with women and trust them to manage their health. No matter the outcome of Roe v. Wade, I will never give up the fight to ensure that women have access to affordable equitable reproductive health care.
* Comptroller Susana Mendoza…
Anger is appropriate today, but action is better. Any woman who thought her vote did not matter has her answer today. Thankfully, the women of the Illinois legislature and their male allies saw this day coming and took action to ensure women in Illinois will maintain control over their own health care decisions with their doctors. This gutting of women’s rights made possible by a stolen Supreme Court seat must inspire us to register, vote, and win back reproductive health care rights for all women.
* Darren Bailey…
* CD17…
Today, Jonathan Logemann, Democratic candidate for Illinois’ 17th Congressional District, released the following statement in response to news reports that the Supreme Court intends to overturn Roe v. Wade:
“This is an outrage. By overturning over 40 years of precedent, the Supreme Court has put abortion rights and women’s health care in a frightening and dangerous new phase. Right-wing extremists have been steadily chipping away at abortion rights for decades, and this appears to be the point of no return. If these reports are true, millions of women will have their healthcare put at risk because of this shocking decision.
I will fight tooth and nail to protect our Constitutional rights and ensure that doctors and patients, not the government, are in charge of making such personal health care decisions. I’m running to keep a politician who has pledged to ban abortion out of Congress, and will instead pass legislation to protect that right. We must never go back to a time when patients risked their lives just to gain access to essential reproductive health care.”
* Senate President Harmon…
Senate President Don Harmon (D-Oak Park) released the following statement on reports indicating that the Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe v. Wade:
“The Supreme Court seems ready to deprive millions of women the right to choose. This is upsetting, but not shocking. It’s why we took so many steps in Illinois to protect this fundamental right.
“The Republican Party continues to disregard the will of the people. This is the most extreme example yet.
“As long as there is a Democratic majority in the Illinois State Senate, women will have their rights protected. We will stand as a bulwark against any efforts to turn back the clock to darker days.”
* Sen. Fine…
Last night, a draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, the case legalizing abortion nationwide, was leaked. State Senator Laura Fine (D-Glenview) released the following statement condemning this decision:
“In this day and age, it is unconscionable that women would be denied reproductive rights,” said State Senator Laura Fine (D-Glenview). “I will fight to ensure women do not go backwards and our fundamental rights are protected.”
* JGG…
State Rep. Jennifer Gong-Gershowitz, D-Glenview, issued the following statement in response to the leak of documents indicating the landmark reproductive rights Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade, is being overturned:
“The possibility that Roe v. Wade will be overturned represents the greatest threat to reproductive rights and bodily autonomy that we have seen in decades. Roe is the foundation upon which reproductive rights have been built and destroying that foundation threatens to topple so much of the hard-fought progress made in the last fifty years.”
“It appears that – once again – a deeply-misguided court mostly composed of men wants to control women’s bodies. That has no place in Illinois. State Representatives, Senators, our Governor, mayors, city councils, officials across Illinois and millions of everyday people will stand up and defend the right to bodily autonomy in this state and we will support our federal officials in fighting for that right in Washington. The vast majority of Americans know that this decision by the Supreme Court is absolutely wrong, and this fight is far from over. We will fight, we will organize, and we will vote – but we will not go back.”
* Walker…
– State Rep. Mark Walker, D-Arlington Heights, issued this statement following media reports regarding a draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade:
“The reported decision by the Supreme Court to overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade case is simply wrong. Access to reproductive health care is a basic right. I’m proud that Illinois is a state that defends women and protects reproductive rights.
“I remember a time before abortion was legalized nationwide and the horrible realities that meant for too many women and families. So long as I’m in the General Assembly, we will not go back.”
* Sen. Gillespie…
State Senator Ann Gillespie (IL-27) released the following statement regarding the leaked draft Supreme Court Opinion overturning Roe V. Wade:
“I marched with women in DC in 2017 - we said then ‘we will not go back.’ I meant it then and I mean it now. That march started me on the path to the Illinois State Senate where I’ve worked with my colleagues to protect women’s reproductive health here in Illinois. This work will continue to be a top priority. We will not go back.”
Sen. Gillespie, Chair of the Senate Women’s Caucus, co-sponsored the Reproductive Health Act in 2019. Her reelection campaign was endorsed by Planned Parenthood Illinois and Personal PAC.
* US Sen. Duckworth…
U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) today reacted to reports that a majority of the Supreme Court has drafted an initial opinion that would effectively overturn Roe v. Wade:
“If this draft opinion becomes reality, a small group far-right Justices would be stripping away protected constitutional rights that millions of American families—including my own—have relied on for 50 years—and that 70% of Americans believe should be legal. The institution, and the Justices who claimed Roe was ‘settled law,’ will struggle to survive the stench of this decision.
“In a nation with a growing maternal mortality crisis and often inaccessible healthcare, without affordable childcare or universal paid leave, forcing births on millions of people—even when the mother’s life could be at risk—is particularly cruel. Before finalizing their decision in this case, I hope these Justices recognize that you cannot ban abortions, you can only criminalize safe abortions—and that their decision in this case could have far-reaching consequences on many, many other rights.
“I will keep working to convince my colleagues in the Senate that we must act to codify Roe v. Wade into law so that every American has equal access to basic, necessary healthcare—regardless of which state they live in, the color of their skin or the size of their income.”
Duckworth has made protecting and expanding access to essential women’s healthcare a top priority and helped introduce the bicameral Women’s Health Protection Act that would guarantee equal access to abortion everywhere. She was outraged when Republicans blocked this critical legislation earlier this year. Additionally, Duckworth is the lead sponsor of the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Healthcare (EACH) Act, which would end the Hyde Amendment and lift unjust abortion coverage restrictions for those who depend on Medicaid and other government-sponsored plans.
* Rep. Marcus Evans…
The Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe V. Wade, which allows access to safe abortion options for women throughout the country.
The draft opinion by Justice Alito would overturn Roe V. Wade, which has been affirmed since 1973. This would eliminate any federal protections for women to make the decision to get an abortion and make decisions about their body. This would return the decision of whether to allow abortion access to each state, which is believed to significantly restrict access nationwide.
“I stand with women and our Illinois leaders to strongly condemn the draft opinion by Justice Alito,” said State Rep. Marcus C. Evans, Jr. “This is not about states’ rights, this is about taking away the rights of women to make the best choice for them and their body and it is completely unacceptable.”
The Supreme Court currently has a six-to-three conservative majority, with three of the nine being appointed by former President Donald Trump. The Supreme Court is expected to announce its ruling as early as Tuesday, May 3, 2022.
* SEIU Healthcare Illinois…
The following was released by SEIU Healthcare Illinois Executive Vice President Erica Bland-Durosinmi on the draft SCOTUS opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade:
“As a union of over 90,000 frontline workers, a majority of whom are women working to support families, we are joining our voices to the millions nationwide decrying this opportunistic attack on a woman’s right to choose.
“As healthcare workers, we must state unequivocally that abortion is healthcare. It’s not only crucial that women have access to this service, but that we are grounded in the reality of what will happen—what has already happened—when abortion is made illegal and inaccessible.
“When women cannot access safe and legal abortion, they seek other options which have already sent far too many women to emergency rooms with life threatening infections and injuries. We remember that before Roe v. Wade, women facing an unplanned pregnancy sometimes died.
“The damage inflicted by restricting abortion access is felt disproportionately by low-income women, who are not only more likely to seek abortion, but also are less likely to have the resources needed to overcome restrictions. While middle class women can often afford to travel to obtain a safe legal abortion, working class women are currently struggling just to make their rent or put food on the table.
“This draft opinion is not only dangerous, it flies directly against the will of the people. In 2020, a poll by AP VoteCast found that 69% of presidential voters wanted the Supreme Court to leave Roe V. Wade just as it is.
“It’s crucial that SCOTUS recognizes that abortion is not only healthcare, but like all forms of healthcare, needs to be available to everyone who seeks it regardless of income.”
* US Rep. LaHood…
Congressman Darin LaHood (IL-18) released the following statement after reports of a draft U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) opinion on the Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case leaked:
“The unprecedented leak of Justice Alito’s reported draft opinion is an attack on the independence of the Supreme Court – a separate and equal branch of our government. Leaders should be defending the Court, but President Biden, Speaker Pelosi, and Governor Pritzker’s statements continue to play into the radical Left’s long-running campaign to intimidate federal judges and politicize the Supreme Court. These efforts to undermine the rule of law, judicial independence, and the Constitution must not be allowed to prevail.
“As a father of three and a staunch Pro-Life advocate, I believe that the Supreme Court should reconsider Roe and that states should be empowered to enact Pro-Life protections for the unborn. Democrats in Illinois and Congress continue to advocate for an extreme abortion agenda which includes late-term and taxpayer-funded abortion, restrictions on conscience protections, and limits on parental involvement.
“I remain committed to upholding the sanctity of Life and will continue to fight for the voiceless in Congress.”
* Equality Illinois…
Statement from Equality Illinois Deputy Director Mony Ruiz-Velasco:
Equality Illinois condemns the US Supreme Court’s draft opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade and eliminate the federal right to abortions, thereby threatening access to safe and legal reproductive healthcare in most of the United States. This decision is violence against all people who need affordable, accessible, and affirming reproductive healthcare; especially trans and gender-expansive people, people of color, people with disabilities, and people living in poverty.
The Court’s draft decision threatens people’s legal right to control their bodies and determine the course of their most intimate personal relationships. Make no mistake: LGBTQ+ rights are in the crosshairs next. The same people who have championed the legal campaign to this draft opinion have already signaled their intent to build off an opinion like this to take away our employment protections, our right to marry legally, and even our right to form intimate relationships free from criminalization.
It has always been time for action, but especially now. Our rights are under attack. We must show up and fight back in the streets and with our vote. We call on our LGBTQ+ communities across the state to activate and ensure our voices are heard.
Our federal elected officials must codify the fundamental right to an abortion into federal law. The United States House of Representatives already acted on the legislation last year. The United States Senate must act immediately.
In Illinois, reproductive healthcare, including abortion, is a fundamental right, thanks to the legislators and advocates who passed the Reproductive Health Act in 2019. However, our Illinois laws would be wiped away if anti-choice and anti-equality politicians take power in Washington, D.C. and adopted a national abortion ban, which is their stated goal. Thus, our state laws hinge on who is elected to the United States Senate, United States House of Representatives, Illinois Supreme Court, Illinois General Assembly, and Governor’s Office at the November 2022 general election.
In Illinois, we must only support and vote for pro-choice, pro-LGBTQ+ quality champions. We must vote!
And those with financial ability must support abortion funds. These funds remove financial and logistical barriers to abortion access for individuals. Please donate.
Chicago Abortion Fund: https://www.chicagoabortionfund.org
Midwest Access Coalition: https://midwestaccesscoalition.org
Missouri Abortion Fund: https://mofund.org
All-Options Hoosier Abortion Fund: https://alloptionsprc.org/our-services/hoosier-abortion-fund/
Iowa Abortion Access Fund: https://www.iowaabortionaccessfund.org
Find more abortion funds at https://abortionfunds.org/funds/.
Finally, we remind everyone again and again: Abortion is healthcare and LGBTQ+ rights are reproductive rights.
* Treasurer Frerichs…
I, like most Americans, believe that personal decisions about pregnancy should be made by the woman, with the support of the people she loves and trusts. We are on the verge of having out of touch – mostly male – politicians criminalizing women and doctors for making these difficult decisions.
As the father of a teenage daughter, I am furious at the hypocritical politicians who are seeking to control her body and have decided that she, and every other woman in my life, and in our country are incapable of making decisions about their own body.
* Rep. Kifowit…
State Rep. Stephanie Kifowit, D-Oswego, issued the following statement after learning of reports that Roe v. Wade is set to be overturned by the Supreme Court:
“The threat of our U.S. Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade comes as no surprise, and the recent reports of a politically motivated U.S. Supreme Court threatens not only all aspects of women’s health but many other protections found under our Constitution. Simply put, if what has been released becomes the final opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court, it will cause irreparable harm to many individuals, especially women, across our country. I believe that women are responsible to make choices about their own bodies and their own reproductive healthcare with a doctor. I am glad to live in the State of Illinois, a state that respects women’s right to choose what are the best healthcare choices for their unique circumstances, and have supported legislative action that will continue in Illinois to ensure women have that right to full reproductive healthcare services.
* Rep. Ford…
State Rep. La Shawn K. Ford, D-Chicago, released the following statement after learning of reports that the Supreme Court is set to overturn Roe v. Wade:
“The battle over Roe v. Wade is about controlling a woman’s body, and I am alarmed that an extremist Supreme Court is poised to restrict health care rights across our county. I was concerned that this day would come, which is why I strongly supported updates to our state laws to preserve reproductive health care access.
“As an adopted person, I trust women and people who may become pregnant. And as a lawmaker, I understand that politicians should not be forcing their personal beliefs on the health rights of others.
“I will continue to support efforts to strengthen protections here in Illinois, and I call on lawmakers in Washington to do what they can to prevent the dangerous consequences a Roe v. Wade reversal would have on women across our country. I stand with women and their right to choose what’s best for them.”
* DAGA…
Last night, a draft opinion stating that the Supreme Court will strike down Roe v. Wade was leaked. While abortion is still legal and remains a constitutional right, this is a crisis moment for abortion access. Democratic Attorneys General are on the front lines of protecting abortion care in states across the country and it’s never been more important to vote for AGs who will fight to protect access in the years ahead.
Statement from DAGA Co-Chairs Nevada AG Aaron Ford and Delaware AG Kathy Jennings:
“This news is devastating and disturbing. While this decision is not yet final, this is a moment we’ve been preparing for and we’re already fighting back. Since 2019, we’ve been the only Democratic political committee with an explicit litmus test for supporting abortion access, and we are doubling down on the importance of protecting this right, especially if Roe falls and the right to abortion care is dismantled.
“We must show up at the ballot box this year and vote to protect abortion access. Alongside leaders in the reproductive rights movement, we are proud to be part of this fight and will never let up on ensuring the people of our states can access reproductive health care safely.”
* Rep. Conroy…
State Rep. Deb Conroy, D-Villa Park, responded to reports that Roe v. Wade is set to be overturned by the Supreme Court with the following statement:
“I am alarmed by the news that an extremist Supreme Court is seeking to destroy the right for women to make their own personal reproductive health choices. This decision will have a devastating impact on women across our country, and is why we must do everything we can to make sure Illinois does not go backwards. Because I knew this day could come, I supported necessary action that proactively removed dangerous trigger provisions in our state laws that could have made abortion illegal here in our state.
“Moving forward, it’s critically important that we continue to reinforce our protections for reproductive health, and ensure everyone has access to the safe health care they deserve. I remain committed to doing all that I can to protect a woman’s right to choose.”
* Rep. Gordon-Booth…
State Rep. Jehan Gordon-Booth, D-Peoria, released the following statement after reports that the Supreme Court is set to overturn Roe v. Wade:
“All women, no matter their background or where they live, deserve the right to make their own personal health decisions. In Illinois we sadly understood that an extremist Supreme Court could try to roll back hard fought reproductive rights that women have depended on for generations. That’s why we worked in recent years to remove dangerous trigger provisions and strengthened protections to ensure that this state would continue to be a safe place for individuals to choose – regardless of what happens to Roe v. Wade. Politicians have no business making personal health care decisions for women, which is why I remain firmly committed to doing everything that I can to reinforce our legal protections here in Illinois.”
* IFI…
The big news of the day has been confirmed by Chief Justice John Roberts. The U.S. Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe v. Wade in the very near future, possibly by the end of June. In a news release from the High Court, however, they were careful to point out that, although the leaked draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito is authentic, “it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case.” In other words, the ruling is not official yet.
If it becomes official, it will be an enormous victory for the sanctity of human life in America. Repealing Roe is what pro-lifers have marched, prayed, worked, and voted for since 1973.
We are relieved to know that many states will restrict or completely outlaw abortion, thereby saving untold number of women and unborn babies from becoming victims. Yet, it’s sobering to realize that states like Illinois, New York, and California will become abortion destination points for those who are determined to kill their pre-born babies. And seeing women come out in droves screaming about the possibility of losing their right to kill their children is a grave reminder that we are in a spiritual battle.
The work before us continues, especially in Illinois. Our ongoing mission is to educate family members, friends and neighbors on the evils of abortion. We’ll need to continue working to change hearts and minds regarding “bodily autonomy,” the science of when life begins, and, most important, the fact that we are all created in the image and likeness of our Creator. As such, every human has an intrinsic and inestimable dignity and worth. (Genesis 1:27)
Our culture has drifted away from God and no longer loves or values the things of God. We see proof of that in a birth rate which is disastrously low and abortion rate disastrously high. This disregard for life is also evidenced in the gang violence in our cities and the skyrocketing suicide and overdose rates plaguing communities throughout the nation.
In response, followers of Jesus Christ must be diligent in praying for the courage, strength, and wisdom to engage the culture forthrightly on the abortion issue. Ironically, this morning, in response to the leaked opinion, U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) spoke dishonestly from the chamber floor to decry the pending decision, claiming that tens of millions of women will lose “bodily autonomy.”
Overturning Roe v. Wade does not constitute the loss of women’s “bodily autonomy” because abortions don’t destroy the bodies of mothers. Abortions destroy the bodies of women’s children. Abortion robs the unborn of bodily autonomy, body integrity, and life.
May God forgive us.
* US Sen. Durbin…
U.S. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today spoke to the alleged leak of the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization during a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action, and Federal Rights hearing entitled, “An Ethical Judiciary: Transparency and Accountability for 21st Century Courts.”
“I don’t condone the leaking of internal Supreme Court documents… I don’t know who leaked the opinion, or why,” Durbin said. “But I know that today, [Americans] across this country are grappling with the very real concern, and yes, the fear, that they may lose a critical constitutional right in just a matter of weeks.”
Durbin continued, “If true, this draft opinion that circulated last night would end a half-century guarantee that reproductive rights are protected by our Constitution. Everyone—no matter where you live or how much money you make—deserves access to health care without barriers or political roadblocks. Regardless of the Supreme Court’s final decision this summer, Congress cannot sit idly by nor can this Committee. We must enshrine into law a woman’s right to make her own health care choices.”
Durbin concluded, “Long before last night’s news, this hearing had already been scheduled to discuss the issues of judicial ethics and transparency. They are important topics, and I welcome the distinguished panel of witnesses here today… And while we’re on the subject, I think we should consider the ethical implications of Supreme Court nominees repeatedly coming before this Committee and testifying under oath that they will respect precedent and then doing exactly the opposite when they are confirmed. We must work to ensure, as Justice Stevens said, ‘the true backbone of the rule of law’ – the confidence in the men and women who administer it. I believe that confidence has been shaken and we must face that alarming reality.”
* Clerk Martinez…
Clerk Iris Y. Martinez condemns Supreme Court Opinion
“As a woman of color, I am concerned that many Brown and Black women will be inordinately impacted. This decision will continue to fuel the devastating consequences upon women who suffer the most prevalent injustices in on our world today.”
* Rep. LaPointe…
LaPointe Appalled by Possible Roe v. Wade Overturn
CHICAGO – State Rep. Lindsey LaPointe, D-Chicago, issued the following statement Tuesday in response to reports that the Supreme Court is set to overturn Roe v. Wade:
“Overturning Roe v. Wade would be an unacceptable assault on the rights of women across our country by a Supreme Court that is out of touch with the will of a majority of Americans. I firmly believe that every woman deserves the right to make their own personal reproductive health decisions, which is why I will continue to fight to strengthen protections for abortion access. If Roe v. Wade is rolled back, Illinois will be the only strong pro-choice state left in the Midwest. This is a dangerous decision that will put lives at risk, and why it’s critically important that we do everything we can to support full access to reproductive healthcare and ensure that Illinois and the country do not fall backwards.”
* Litesa Wallace…
Citing her past record of advocacy, former State Rep. Litesa Wallace, Democratic candidate for Congress in Illinois’ 17th District, on Tuesday called on Illinois to become a fortress for reproductive freedom for women in the Midwest living in states that will immediately criminalize abortion with the expected reversal of Roe vs. Wade.
As a state legislator, Wallace took steps to make Illinois a haven state, including rescinding the Hyde Amendment.
Said Wallace today in advance of a League of Women Voters-sponsored forum at Bradley University here in Peoria:
“The nightmare we all warned about and feared-and which anti-choice extremists like Esther Joy King have been welcoming-is now here. When I was in the Assembly, I did everything I could to make sure Illinois was a ‘Haven State’ for neighbors like Iowa and Wisconsin, where abortion will immediately be criminalized when Roe vs. Wade is overturned. We must do everything we can and become ‘Fortress Illinois’ for all the poor women throughout the Midwest whose lives will be upended by the moral obscenity of this Supreme Court.”
Wallace, endorsed by Winnebago Citizens for Choice, also called on anti-choice activist Esther Joy King, the frontrunner for the Republican nomination for the 17th District, to clarify her position on abortion rights:
“Republican extremist Esther Joy King has been silent in the immediate aftermath of the Supreme Court news. She owes it to the voters of the 17th Congressional District to fully outline her position on reproductive freedom. She previously has touted her endorsements by anti-choice groups that seek to totally outlaw abortion, even in cases of rape, incest and for the life of the mother. She must be held accountable for her hostility to freedom for women.”
- Leslie K - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 5:00 am:
This morning, here, is the first I heard, so I am still processing. One thing I am certain of–that headline by Politico was completely irresponsible. Primarily because of what Vox correctly notes:
==there is one big thing that we do not yet know about this opinion: Whether it will bear any resemblance to the final decision that the Court is expected to release by late June.==
Reading the snippets of the “full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision,” I became very suspicious about its “finality”. This is a draft. Even those in the apparent majority have not signed on yet, and sometimes votes change after drafts like these are circulated (i.e. seeing the logical conclusion of the original position causes a justice to rethink their opinion; here, it seems, the alarming conclusion that debunks the entire concept of penumbral rights such as privacy). This situation could ultimately turn into a plurality decision, in which no single decision receives a majority and the question is left unanswered.
But all that is apparently too much nuance for many to even try for. People are waking up today enraged or exhuberant, believing only that there has been a definitive decision, with their anger or joy stoked by the politician of their choice.
I fear a long day (and weeks) in the streets for many. I also fear that an opinion that had the potential to be much less severe in its final form might have now been backed into a corner by premature publicity.
- Mary Poppins - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 5:38 am:
to all the men who comment on here all the time about how abortion isn’t a big deal in this election or that women were being “hysterical” about Trump, I know you don’t feel shame or empathy, so I’ll just duck you.
I don’t care if you think “preborn babies” have more rights than the person in which they exist, unless it’s growing IN you, putting stress on your organs, you can stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 6:04 am:
This election won’t be about crime.
Nope.
This election won’t be about crime.
The silence, and the glee of those willing to speak, Republicans are now on the wrong side of arguably the biggest SCOTUS reversal in 40+ years.
Avery Bourne spoke passionately, while pregnant herself, about abortion on the floor of the Illinois House. The Irvin Crew need not worry about saying anything, the Bourne quotes will say it all.
Bailey, Rabine, even Schimpf… can’t see them deciding this inevitable by SCOTUS making them magically pro-choice. It’s not like any silence will make any of these three stronger candidates either.
Sullivan? Sullivan is performance art. Sullivan is as phony as a snake oil salesman, but lacks any appearance of selling honesty to character in his baloney. Sullivan’s statement only solidifies how truly awful it could be for Republicans with Sullivan atop the ticket.
But this election will be about crime… this election will *be* about… crime.
This is a game changer. This possible decision flips the field in a way that even Trump can’t unite his own opponents… Roe unites and also engages.
You want suburban women scared? Don’t tell them about crime, merely remind them that once Roe is overturned, “thank Republicans for that… Republicans are dangerous to your health, and now Republicans have taken away your choices.”
Pick your poison, GOP;
Embrace the overturning of Roe, being on the very lopsided wrong side (polling) of the hottest issue in America.
Decide to not embrace overturning Roe, and see how it feels when the base leaves you like the base left Rauner… never to return again.
But… this election is about crime…
This is Illinois, the GOP silence here, less then stolen valor Californian… this silence is one after another seeing an implosion.
The dog has caught the car, biting that bumper as the car speeds away… “I got it”… but what exactly does a Republican in Illinois got with Roe reversed?
The Bourne speech, the Bourne questions… the members of the HGOP … they applauded Bourne, at every turn yielding their own time… to Bourne… lots of words to say for Bourne, and I suspect Pritzker will amplify all of them, if Bourne and Irvin win come July.
Lastly…
Can Dems rally around and make this something that gets their own base energized?
Can Dems realize how much the field has flipped, so much so the ILGOP, silent and meek, can’t say too much even today?
Can Dems lead or will outside leadership in Personal PAC, and others, take this and run so far ahead of Dems that Dems play catch up in all things campaign?
This election is about crime…
It’s not. It won’t be. The election now begins anew.
This election will not be about crime… the silent GOP tells me so.
- Blue Dog - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 6:16 am:
The Blue Dog family has sort of been split over this issue for decades. Me. Not my hot button issue. Not necessarily for abortion, but not much into other folks decisions that don’t affect me. Mrs Blue on the other hand, is feverishly opposed to abortion. Prayer groups. Meetings. Marches. You name it. She’s euphoric this morning.
- The Dude - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 7:01 am:
I support states rights to choose and I support abortion which is why these people should move here if they want to have the choice.
If states want abortion they can have it. This mindset breaks a lot of hard left democrats because they just want to impose their policy on others local communities.
- Lt Guv - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 7:03 am:
Willie’s correct. Now, the real election begins.
- Former Downstater - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 7:05 am:
The Dude- Ah, the just move to where you have rights arguments. So convenient, trite, and ridiculous. I prefer a country where all of us have the same rights, no matter where you live.
- Louis G Atsaves - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 7:17 am:
A draft opinion circulated in February? Was this the first one? Isn’t this how the SC acts in drafting opinions? By circulating drafts after an initial vote? Any edits or changes to this opinion? Is this designed to prevent a change in voting after circulation of drafts?
Is it the final opinion? Why would they have an appendix of 1860’s laws on the subject? Would it surprise anyone that an initial draft would be forcefully written so as to influence the rest to vote in favor? Or will that language cause some to change their vote?
What was the vote? Did any votes change during the circulation of the various drafts? Any dissenting opinions drafted? If so, where are they? I’m sure those initial dissent drafts would be equally forceful in their language and arguments.
How irresponsible and dangerous to leak out an early draft. If designed to bring down one of the three branches of Government, then the insurrectionist(s) who leaked it and the insurrectionist(s) who published it need to face the music.
Consider this, those who may be swayed by counter arguments to change their votes, or partially agree and partially dissent would be afraid to do so due to public opinion and vice-versa. The nuance of deciding cases goes right out of the window. What is next, putting cameras in jury rooms during deliberations?
Weasel move by the leaker. Weasel move to publish by Politico.
- West Side the Best Side - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 7:19 am:
Agree with Leslie K. This is - if legit - only a draft. There can be changes, there can be justices who might decide they don’t want their names on it as written, all sorts of things can happen between now and the final ruling. People just don’t handle nuance well. Now I think I’ll see if my flag is any brighter.
- H-W - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 7:25 am:
It is as if the Ninth Amendment doesn’t exist.
- Da big bad wolf - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 7:43 am:
So I’m guessing Kavanaugh was inebriated when he told Susan Collins he wouldn’t touch RvW? Go figure.
“She’s euphoric this morning.”
Why? States already are banning abortions in spite of RvW. What difference will it make?
- Arsenal - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 7:47 am:
The silence of ILGOP- and, at the national level, the crocodile tears over “the leak”- tells you a lot about how they think this is going to go for them. But stuff like that can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. If Dems are the only ones messaging on this issue, their message is going to control.
- TheInvisibleMan - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:08 am:
“(and the lack thereof by much of the GOP)”
There is no doubt work on coordinating the message. Which will be a combination of blaming the leaker, and how catholics are going to become victims from this.
I’m not joking.
Not only is this just the start, the plans have been published for awhile now.
If you aren’t aware of “Project Blitz” yet, now would be a good time to make yourself aware.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:13 am:
===Which will be a combination of blaming the leaker, and how catholics are going to become victims from this.===
That’ll work with suburban women, I’m sure.
When the dog catches the car, blaming the car or this car that was caught changes little.
- Huh? - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:15 am:
I guess “settled law” is settled until there is super majority opposition on SCOTUS.
So much for “honest and truthful” congressional testimony.
- Watchful eye. - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:17 am:
Rabine had a statement in Crains last night.
- Narc - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:19 am:
About rights not “deeply rooted in history”, the right of a woman to open a bank account in her own name is younger than Roe.
- Zyxwvut - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:21 am:
Democrats control congress and the Whitehouse. They’ve controlled every facet of the federal government before. They could have, and could still codify abortion protections into federal law. Unfortunately, there is actually no desire for that to happen because they will always want to keep this as a campaign issue. There’s too much fundraising associated with the issue. It’s sad.
- Politics Drives Policy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:23 am:
On both sides, it’s just fundraising and bomb throwing. Nothing in IL will actually change… if anything this allows J.B. and company to make IL an abortion first state in the Midwest. Probably a bit relieved as it justifies his legislation the last two years.
But once again nothing here will change and does not move the needle regardless of SCOTUS.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:24 am:
===want to keep this as a campaign issue.===
It’s a campaign issue now.
You think Dems like or appreciate Manchin or Sinema because “fundraising”
Nope.
Good try.
- Pundent - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:26 am:
=This mindset breaks a lot of hard left democrats because they just want to impose their policy on others local communities.=
I think it’s the hard right Republicans that cause woman to worry. For the hard right it would be expected that we do everything possible to move in this direction. You think Irvin is going to get their support by saying this is “settled” in Illinois?
- Huh? - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:27 am:
Zyxwvut - what don’t you understand about the senate and the filibuster rules?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:27 am:
===But once again nothing here will change and does not move the needle regardless of SCOTUS.===
Polling and the silence of the ILGOP says otherwise.
If you’re a GOP candidate saying “nothing changes”, you just lost the base of the party.
Another swing and a miss.
Plus, tens of millions reminding folks “Republicans are dangerous to women’s health”… and HB40’s roll call… nope… no one is safe with Roe overturned.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:30 am:
=They could have, and could still codify abortion protections into federal law.=
Do you understand how the three branches of government work and the role of the USSC in that process? Civics 101. The USSC appears to be ready to strike down the idea that abortion is a right. Given that likely decision, a federal law would not last before this court.
- TheInvisibleMan - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:30 am:
“Nothing in IL will actually change”
Today.
In the near future, not so certain.
For some reason you seem to be taking the word that this is going to be “state’s rights” issue, from people who have been constantly lying to you about Roe being settled law.
A republican Congress could and likely will pass a law making abortion illegal nationwide.
The gauntlet has been thrown.
- Politics Drives Policy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:31 am:
-no one is safe with Roe overturned-
A bit dramatic OW even for you…
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:34 am:
=== bit dramatic===
Not really.
A bit callous thinking a victim of rape or incest must carry a pregnancy to term.
Who exactly stays safe?
Try again.
- lake county democrat - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:42 am:
Beyond the obvious, there’s a chance this decision drives LGBTQ voters (and their friends/family) to the polls in an effort to protect their current rights. The biggest thing the party out-of-power has in the midterm elections is that their voters are upset and motivated - the GOP had that passion advantage locked up prior to yesterday.
- Jibba - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:44 am:
I love it how precedent only applies to decisions that the supremes agree with; otherwise they are “wrongly decided”.
There is no middle ground with those who truly believe that abortion is murder. How can there be? But they are in the vast minority in the populace. Hopefully we can end the rule of the minority in this country.
Thanks to the Supremes for setting the stage for fierce, ongoing political battles and (hopefully) nonviolent protest in all 50 states for the foreseeable future.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:52 am:
- Louis G Atsaves -
Such an opine.
=== Is it the final opinion? Why would they have an appendix of 1860’s laws on the subject? Would it surprise anyone that an initial draft would be forcefully written so as to influence the rest to vote in favor? Or will that language cause some to change their vote?
What was the vote? Did any votes change during the circulation of the various drafts? Any dissenting opinions drafted? If so, where are they? I’m sure those initial dissent drafts would be equally forceful in their language and arguments.===
Are you pro-life? Just so I have context.
Thanks.
- Southern - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:55 am:
Did someone say the vote of suburban women is important in Illinois elections?
- Give Me A Break - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:55 am:
My daughters who are about as politically involved as a tree, told me last night their social media feeds and text messages from their female friends exploded when the story came out.
My two daughters are in their mid 20s and early 30s, to say they and their friends are suddenly aware of the GOP’s agenda is understating, and you can rest assured they don’t view the GOP agenda as something they like.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:57 am:
=Weasel move by the leaker. Weasel move to publish by Politico.=
Were you so strongly opined with Wikileaks publishing other leaks, more favorable to the gop cause? Consistency.
So the issue (for you) isn’t the likely decision? I think LA County Sheriff Alex Villanueva may have a job for you.
- Treefiddy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 8:59 am:
Rodney Davis’ office put out this statement a bit ago:
“As a Pro-Life lawmaker, I’ve long advocated for an end to the ‘Roe’ decision. It was wrong from the beginning, and I hope the Court’s pending decision empowers states to enact pro-Life laws and protect the unborn.
“I am deeply concerned by the fact this draft opinion was leaked. This is nothing more than an attempt to intimidate the justices on this case and sway their opinion. A leak of this magnitude must be condemned and, if warranted, investigated and prosecuted. Those on the Left who are cheering this lawless type of behavior are contributing to the undermining of our Nation’s institutions and civic processes. Please pray for the safety of the justices on our Supreme Court.
“Democrats will use this moment to continue their push for a radical, pro-abortion agenda that’s far outside the mainstream. They are advocating for late-term and taxpayer-funded abortion, limits on parental involvement, restrictions on conscience objections, and more - nationwide, in all fifty states. Their extreme pro-abortion agenda is appalling and wrong. I will continue to oppose them every step of the way.”
- SWIL_Voter - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:01 am:
“How irresponsible and dangerous to leak out an early draft.”
Our unelected, unaccountable overlords must deliberate in secret with our tax dollars as they decide the fates of millions of women. Grow up
- Leap Day William - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:01 am:
==This mindset breaks a lot of hard left democrats because they just want to impose their policy on others local communities.==
This is one of the most disingenuous comments I’ve read here, and I’ve seen everything Lucky Pierre posts.
Nobody and I mean absolutely NOBODY on any part of the left, from the most mushy of moderate left-leaners to the die hard leftists, is pushing their policy on others. Nobody on the left is for mandating abortion, for dictating population control, or anything else. They are working hard to ensure that if someone wants an abortion for reasons that are between them and their doctor, that they have access to it.
The ONLY group imposing their policy on others is the right. They are telling women what they can and can’t do with their bodies and are directly seeking to be in the decision-making process between a woman and her doctor. THAT is an imposition of policy on a community. And it doesn’t end there, as the justice indicated in their draft that they are looking to go further.
- Levois J - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:01 am:
It’s very interesting there is hardly much Republican response to this development at the same time I know there will be a reaction. Abortion is a polarizing issue there is hardly any in between.
- Leslie K - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:02 am:
==no one is safe with Roe overturned==
Just as a status check:
-we have a draft opinion without sign on by majority. Parts of the majority could still be swayed, and the possibility of a pluarilty (or a true shift) is still in the offing
-if this draft as written does become the opinion, OW is 100% correct. Any right decided under the concept of “privacy” is at risk:
–right to contraception/to discuss such with dr
–privacy of the bedroom (e.g. sodomoy–which covers same-sex, not just homosexual, for those of you who don’t think it’s about you)
–gay marriage
And so on. That draft is not just about abortion
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:02 am:
After reading Davis’ statement…
(Snark on) For all we know it was a Right leaning intern that leaked it to help Republicans message out the inevitable Clarence Thomas court’s gutting of Roe? (Snark off)
- SWIL_Voter - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:03 am:
Pray for the safety of the justices? I’m sure they’ll be fine. The women who will be victimized by this are another story
- Amalia - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:03 am:
Read the leaked document. It is riddled with inconsistencies, talk of quickening but then oh we can’t have that, an appendix of laws from states which does not start with the birth of our nation dude, blunt words. An infuriating wakeup call.
- ZC - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:04 am:
The text of the decision may well change - it’s almost certainly not the current draft, if it really stems from February - but I really doubt the substantive result is going to change.
The most defensible reason for leaking it early, is otherwise sometime in June, suddenly, the decision would flip a switch. And that abortion procedure you had scheduled, the next morning, is suddenly gone because it’s now illegal in your state. And now you are desperately scrambling to figure out what to do next, what to do, while possibly millions of other women are all doing the same thing. Total chaos, in other words.
I think someone in the vicinity of the Supreme Court wanted, at the bare minimum, to give women and abortion clinics two months to prepare for what’s coming.
- Cheryl44 - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:06 am:
They just told us who they are, and I believe them.
- Roadrager - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:08 am:
==A republican Congress could and likely will pass a law making abortion illegal nationwide.==
They’re already working on this. Once the GOP takes the House and Senate, one of the first things you’re going to see is a bill for a Texas-style six week ban at the federal level. Sure, it will get vetoed, but it will let every culture warrior know that all they need is a Republican president elected in 2024 and it will happen immediately.
And yes, Alito’s text lets everyone know it’s open season on “settled law” and civil rights for anything put to paper after the 10th Amendment, and maybe a few choice selections within those first ten. Originalism is a very firm, but also somehow extremely mobile, line. This is the moment the Republicans have been building out for four decades now, while establishment Democrats insisted that no, they would never actually.
The far right in this country has won decisively, and now they’re going to spend their days complaining that the refs and their opponents haven’t been nice enough to them.
- SWIL_Voter - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:11 am:
“Parts of the majority could still be swayed, and the possibility of a pluarilty (or a true shift) is still in the offing”
They wouldn’t be there if they could be swayed
- Pundent - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:11 am:
=Those on the Left who are cheering this lawless type of behavior are contributing to the undermining of our Nation’s institutions and civic processes.=
Rodney Davis educating us on civics and reminding all how things might have been different if Merrick Garland received a hearing and Amy Coney Barrett didn’t.
- illini - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:13 am:
Is anyone else wondering why Rodney is so concerned about this “leak” and the fact that this is “undermining out Nation’s institutions and civic processes”? Where has he ever expressed such concern about what happened in the failed coup of January 6?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:20 am:
Gary Rabine;
“… I have always been pro-life and believe the legal reasoning of Roe is tortured at best. If this comes to pass it is a victory for conservatives all over the country.”
Good for June, July and thereafter, prolly “not so much”
- WestBurbs - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:23 am:
I am staunchly pro-choice. But am also a lawyer and student of SCt. That said:
1. The existence of a Constitutional right to “privacy” (the basis for Roe) always has been debatable at best - “privacy”is not, literally, in the Constitution.
2. Overturning precedent happens and that can be a good thing - Brown vs Bd of Ed overturned Plessy (allowing segregation) after 58 years
3. People are correct to fear overturning of other “privacy” rights - contraception, gay marriage, sodomy, etc.
4. Draft opinions always change but - my opinion - the “harshness” of this draft shouldn’t suggest that it will change - gotta be harsh to overturn precedent - by definition, have to decide the precedent was horribly decided.
6. The fact that approx 70% of population support Roe is irrelevant. The SCt is designed to be immune to public opinion - role is to protect the minority. Obviously, that is an ideal but no Justice would rely on public opinion.
- Cheryl44 - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:25 am:
Those of you who think this is great, you do realize they’re coming for all birth control. All of it.
- Palatine Princess - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:28 am:
If you think that next up aren’t other rights “not deeply rooted in history” such as Lawrence v. Texas (legalizing sodomy), Obergefell v. Hodges (legalizing same-sex marriage), Griswold v. Connecticut (legalizing birth control), and Virginia vs. Loving (Legalizing interracial marriage), you’re sadly deluded. Remember that petty cruelty and a complete inability to show empathy aren’t just by-products in today’s Republican party, they ARE the desired outcome.
- Arsenal - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:29 am:
The focus on “the leak” is extremely silly. There’s no law against leaking SCOTUS decisions, and in fact, the original Roe v. Wade decision was leaked to Time Magazine. It’s also as likely as anything to have come from Alito in order to keep his four other votes in line. All in all, this feels like the dogs who caught the car are now trying to change the subject.
- Blake - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:30 am:
Re: Narc@8:19, the logic I hear from the judicial right is distinguishing between rights through judicial decision vs rights through legislation. It also reminds me of Ezra Klein saying part of polarization is legislators aren’t playing with live ammunition often enough, granted this probably ain’t an area Klein wants to give legislatures live ammunition.
- brugroffil - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:33 am:
The most shocking thing to me is that anyone still views SCOTUS as legitimate rather than 9 unelected peoples in robes ruling the country by decree.
- Arsenal - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:34 am:
==Re: Narc@8:19, the logic I hear from the judicial right is distinguishing between rights through judicial decision vs rights through legislation.==
There’s something to that, but if 50%+1 can take away your rights, are they really rights?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:43 am:
(Tips cap to - Leslie K -)
=== Any right decided under the concept of “privacy” is at risk:
–right to contraception/to discuss such with dr
–privacy of the bedroom (e.g. sodomoy–which covers same-sex, not just homosexual, for those of you who don’t think it’s about you)===
You understand the whole ball game… the whole thing.
No one is safe with Roe overturned… the attack on “privacy” and to that is the ball game.
- RNUG - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:44 am:
For everyone saying this will end abortion in some states, here’s a bit of food for thought.
The States have speed limits, helmet laws, etc. because that is a condition of taking federal highway money.
What’s to say that the federal government at some point in the future won’t try to tie some level of abortion rights to acceptance of Medicaid funding? I suspect, like the highway funding, most States will comply to get the funding.
May be some bumps along the way, but this will get worked out in the long run. The only reason people should be upset is if they believe the religious right is going to completely control Congress for the next number of decades … and I don’t see that happening.
- Pundent - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:50 am:
=The SCt is designed to be immune to public opinion - role is to protect the minority.=
The decision brings front and center how critical the appointment of justices is. There’s a reason why Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land for 50 years and why it may not be very soon. It has far more to do with ideological appointments, enabled (or disabled) by the Senate Majority Leader, than protecting the minority.
- Southern - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:02 am:
Hilarious how the right is crying about the leak, but not talking about the decision itself. The Regular Joe and Regular Jane don’t give a darn about the who/what/when of the leaking, or about the “sanctity” of the SCOTUS deliberation process.
- Left of what - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:03 am:
If anyone thinks this will affect the midterms, they don’t understand politics
- RNUG - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:04 am:
== The fact that approx 70% of population support Roe ==
It’s a bit more nuanced than that. From the surveys I’ve seen where they delved further into the question, they support some portions of Roe, not everything that Roe has beed stretched to cover. Part of the reason the country is so divided over the issue.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:05 am:
===If anyone thinks this will affect the midterms, they don’t understand politics===
Then Republicans should embrace this possible decision
I’m noticing a big majority in Illinois aren’t… yet.
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:08 am:
=== Hilarious how the right is crying about the leak,===
It’s almost like the Republicans think there is a fundamental right to privacy.
- Left of what - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:09 am:
I meant more generally there will be a null effect. Illinois is a deep vote state with dem supermajorities. Nationally, gop has a big structural advantage. How would this move the needle this year?
- Left of what - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:11 am:
=== Hilarious how the right is crying about the leak,===
Especially because I wouldn’t write off that the leak came from the liberal side. Overturning roe has been a decades long ideological crusade for the right. This is this is an enormous win for them.
- Left of what - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:15 am:
Meant write off that the didn’t come from the liberal side.
- Pundent - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:15 am:
=Illinois is a deep vote state with dem supermajorities.=
Largely due to continued incompetence within the ILGOP. Hasn’t always been that way and certainly doesn’t have to be so in the future.
- Left of what - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:18 am:
===Largely due to continued incompetence within the ILGOP===
I would say it is due mostly to suburbs trending away from the gop in the 2010s and gerrymandering.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:22 am:
===gerrymandering===
Statewide races say otherwise.
=== Especially because I wouldn’t write off that the leak came from the liberal side.===
(Again, Snark on)
It coulda been Republican leaning folks to stave off the shock and anger in a longer window.
(Again, snarl off)
If this is about elections and consequences and locals… than locals will decide and blame and punish Republicans for being dangerous to women’s health?
Prolly why the responses are about the “leak” not embracing the possible ruling, unabashedly
- WestBurbs - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:22 am:
RNUG - agreed that my “70%” comment ignored the nuance - my point was solely that the SCt is not designed to follow (and should not follow) public opinion.
- WestBurbs - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:27 am:
Nobody has mentioned the elephant in the room — 6 of 9 Justices are Catholic.
Of course, one can identify as a certain religion without adhering to all of its tenets (for example, Biden). But when the issue - abortion - is perhaps the most important public issue in your religion, I don’t think we can ignore the religious affiliation of the Justice.
I’m trying to think of a corollary issue for other public legal issues and other religions — as abortion is to Catholic, ___ is to Judaism, for example. And I’m stumped.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:31 am:
===Statewide races say otherwise.===
Who? Rauner?
Not sure I get the comment on the snark bit. If you’re saying conservatives leaked it to mitigate damage knowing the news cycle moves quickly I get that.
- Left of what - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:31 am:
Sorry, I’m anonymous @ 10:31
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:35 am:
=== Who? Rauner?===
Topinka, Kirk…
Then look at the stellar candidates of 2018… yep, you’ll need to Google em
- Da big bad wolf - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:36 am:
Let’s not forget this isn’t the 70s. Most abortions are administered by pills. Pills that are sold over the counter in most countries. Pills that can arrive in the mail. Making abortion illegal isn’t going to reduce abortions. Only birth control can do that.
We won’t be able to keep pills from people who want them. Look at how successful government is at keeping people from taking painkillers.
- thechampaignlife - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:50 am:
===if 50%+1 can take away your rights, are they really rights?===
If 5 people can take away your rights, are they really rights? The closest we have to immutable rights are those that are codified in the Constitution with 67% (Congress) + 75% (state ratification). Everything else is a chaotic mix of “rights” established by the tension between populism, progressivism, and conservativism among the 3 branches, and the systemic roadblocks designed to dampen the swings between those positions such that the arc bends towards the majority while easing the minority into the change.
This happens to be one of those perfect storm moments where the underlying resonance frequencies all match to produce a big swing. A failure of the dampening system resulting in a significant localized bend towards the minority position.
- Just curious - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:51 am:
Any pro abortion commenters here care to share
Their point of view
On what you’d consider as limit to abortion
6 weeks
12 weeks
Full term ?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:53 am:
- Just curious -
You think victims of rape and/or incest should be forced to have a pregnancy go to term?
Thanks.
- Just curious - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:56 am:
Ow
What is Your limit
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:57 am:
- Just curious -
I opined on my take. Use the Google key.
Also, you have no limit, so victims are required to carry to term pregnancies?
- Just curious - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:58 am:
ow
I asked a simple question
What is your limit
- Demoralized - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:59 am:
Don’t ask a question you aren’t willing to answer yourself. We don’t answer to you
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:00 am:
Can’t use Google?
https://capitolfax.com/2022/01/21/question-of-the-day-3383/
Again, you require victims of rape and/or incest to have a pregnancy go to term?
- Just curious - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:05 am:
Demoralized.
Lol
So typical
- Demoralized - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:08 am:
You want to answer your own question or do you want to continue to act like a child. Either put up or shut up.
- Just curious - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:09 am:
I’d say 6 weeks
Ow do you have a number
- illinifan - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:09 am:
Slippery slope. References to other decisions relating to LGBQT rights are made in this draft. The crazy part of arguing state rights opens the avenue to one state allowing same gender marriages or abortions and another state saying none of these are legal. What happens when you cross state lines? Some states are attempting to make it illegal for a woman to travel to other states to obtain an abortion, thus restricting a person’s right to travel freely? This all from a party that wants the government out of persons lives. Who argued mask mandates were too much restriction of freedom. Give me a break.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:11 am:
=== do you have a number===
Asked and answered.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:11 am:
Thank you.
I would say at the point the baby can live outside the womb, which I think is about 22 or 23 weeks. Or, it could be later if there is an issue with the life or health of the mother.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:13 am:
==This all from a party that wants the government out of persons lives.==
They do until they don’t. They love to tell people what to do when it comes to personal matters. Abortion. Marriage. Sex. They want to control the crap out of you when it comes to stuff like that. They are hypocrites.
- Just curious - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:17 am:
Ow. Didn’t see a number
- Banish Misfortune - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:18 am:
There is way too much pearl clutching about the leak of the decision with respect to women having the right to make private decisions prior to the viability of the fetus. That approach is consistent with Democrats repeatedly bringing knives to gunfights. They have been snookered at least since Bush v Gore.
The only reason for this “tradition” is to make it possible for the dishonest justices (dishonest because they said in hearings that they would not overrule Roe v Wade because it is established precedent) to leave town to their summer homes and avoid at least the initial consequences of the decision.
I am glad it got leaked, recognizing that it may be an early draft.
btw, I have always thought Alito to be the worst, most snake like of the justices.
Of course this only affects lower income women and girls. Middle and upper income women (Republicans) will be able to travel to Illinois (and other blue states easily)
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:19 am:
=== I can’t, personally, think that my beliefs in this issue should be put upon anyone, and if someone in my family chooses an abortion (they may have and not shared with anyone, more than possible) I want that option to be as safe and accessible for them, and hope they, and all, feel safe with the choice, from the decision and thereafter.===
Asked… and answered
- Demoralized - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:21 am:
==I have always thought Alito to be the worst==
Justice Alito has made clear that if he had his way people would be able to use their religion to get around any law they don’t like. He has made it clear that a person’s religious objection to something is absolute.
- Just curious - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:21 am:
Not really
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:22 am:
=== Not really===
Then I’ve humored your ignorance long enough.
Good luck.
- Pundent - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:23 am:
=Ow. Didn’t see a number=
Lot’s of aggression here. The thing about being pro choice is that it’s an acknowledgement that the decision ultimately belongs to the pregnant woman, not your idea of what you think it should be based on some arbitrary construct.
- Marine Life - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:31 am:
Jesse, what is flag shine and does it come in a bottle?
- Anyone Remember - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:40 am:
Just curious -
Ever heard of Josef Fritzl?
Savita Halappanavar?
- Just curious - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:41 am:
No aggression on my part
Yes pro choice
But shouldn’t there be a limit
Do you really advocate for aborting a full term baby
Demoralized offered 22 weeks
But you know if you are pregnant way before that
So. Yes pro choice
But at what limit
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:43 am:
===But===
Asked. Answered.
Read, comprehend, grasp.
- Huh? - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:44 am:
“the point the baby can live outside the womb, which I think is about 22 or 23 weeks”
There are extraordinary medical interventions necessary to ensure viability of a 22 week old neonate. Huge medical bills, continued long term health problems for the baby and family.
A 22 week neonate weighs about 1 pound about the size of a loaf of bread. Smaller than a whole chicken.
These babies are incredibly fragile. The emotional toll on medical staff and families is extraordinary.
- Grandson of Man - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:44 am:
According to this poll, there is strong support for upholding Roe, allowing abortion in all/most cases and leaving the medical choice to women and their doctors (highest support).
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/supreme-court-poised-reverse-roe-americans-support-abortion/story?id=84468131
- Just curious - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:47 am:
You ask me this because
You assume I am anti abortion
I am pro choice
But think there should be limits
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:49 am:
- Just curious -
I’ve moved on from you. You haven’t grasped that either.
To the post,
As HB40 will be a big part of the record, if/when Cassidy decides to add more bills, Republicans might not want to be on the record… again, and again… and once again.
- Joe Bidenopolous - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:52 am:
==Weasel move by the leaker. Weasel move to publish by Politico.==
When you can’t argue substance, argue process, amiright???? Were you outraged when McConnell blocked a SITTING US PRESIDENT FROM NOMINATING A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE? Were you outraged when the orange blob forced ACB through with McConnell’s help less than a month before the orange blob LOST? No? Then GTFO. You’re the weasel.
- Just curious - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 11:58 am:
I’ve moved on from you
You would not give a direct number
Fine whatever
My last comments was not to you
- here we go - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 12:00 pm:
The right is concerned about the leak and suddenly about process. They need to talk to their Supreme Court Justice whose wife was plotting to overthrow the last presidential election. Let’s talk process.
On the Dem side, the what if’s are mind boggling. What if the 2016 Clinton campaign hadn’t been so inept and actually campaigned to win Wisconsin and Michigan. Game over. What if RBG had done the right thing and retired earlier? Game over. What if the national Democrats had not given up in Rural America, handing state legislatures to Republicans all over the country? What if the GOP hadn’t refused to allow President Obama his choice of Merrick Garland?
Ugh.
- Yiddishcowboy - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 12:19 pm:
I dont have many things to say as my comments would surely get me banned…and I do enjoy commenting occasionally. Suffice it to say, this draft opinion, if it comes to pass, will cause me to shift to the Left. Pretty scary happenings for women…in 2022, no less. Shameful.
- wildcat12 - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 12:42 pm:
“Demoralized offered 22 weeks
But you know if you are pregnant way before that.”
Yes, but knowledge of pregnancy is not the only reason women seek abortions. There are abortions performed on pregnancies that were desperately wanted because factors threatening the life of the baby or mother are discovered as the pregnancy progresses.
I, too, am in favor of some restrictions past a certain point, but I believe there should never be a case in which a woman has to carry and deliver a fetus that she knows will be still born or die shortly after delivery.
And it should go without saying that a woman should not be compelled to risk her own life to give birth.
- Narc - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 12:49 pm:
=== Any pro abortion commenters here care to share
Their point of view
On what you’d consider as limit to abortion===
When the pregnant person decides they no longer want to be pregnant, for whatever reason they have that is none of my business.
Counter question: at what point can the state force someone to go through with a risky pregnancy when they do not wish to?
Extra credit: if the state can claim it has a compelling governmental interest in how you use your uterus, can they also compel you to, say, donate blood? Plasma? A kidney?
- thoughts matter - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 2:17 pm:
I think this will affect the midterm elections. There are women alive today who remember life before Roe. They remember the ‘back alley’ procedures that took women’s lives and their capability to have future children. It’s a pretty important issue. Important enough that people will vote solely based on it. After all, I’m aware of people whose vote was solely on the other side of this same issue. Who told me flat out that all they cared about was getting a GOP guy elected so he could control the Supreme Court picks. They didn’t care about his actual beliefs.
I think the midterm election turn out will be higher than it was expected to be yesterday.
- WestBurbs - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 2:22 pm:
Most of the comments (on all sides) focus on the good/bad of abortion. But the issue before the SCt is not whether abortion is good/bad but rather whether it is a right protected by the Constitution. From a purely legal/academic/constitutional law viewpoint, that is a question without an obvious answer.
Given that, the key is to vote out those with strict anti-abortion views - they are the minority and should not be making laws for the majority. If we can do that, then we don’t need to rely on Constitutional protections built on “implied” rights.
I know I’m preaching to the choir but the righteous indignation needs to be directed against the pols, not the Justices.
- Moist von Lipwig - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 2:31 pm:
==James Randolph Thompson Center==
Since when was Big Jim’s middle name Randolph?
- anon2 - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 2:35 pm:
People evaluate decisions by whether they agree with the outcome. Roe v. Wade was a gross judicial overreach. Now the battle will be on the state level, which is where it was prior to Roe.
- Real - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 2:49 pm:
This abortion issue really is just a modern day version of what Pharaoh did concerning the captives becoming too greater in number than his own people.
- Huh? - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 2:53 pm:
Westburbs- over turning RoevWade puts a spike into the right of privacy.
No longer will we be able to say “that’s private” and expect government to respect that decision.
- illinifan - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 2:55 pm:
Just curious, I would hazard a quest that there are no “pro-abortion” supporters. There are persons who are pro-choice. In other words the government and others should not have an input to what I decide in private with my doctor or other health care provider, possibly my religious advisor, my conscious and my spouse/parent/or father of the child.
- Socially DIstant Watcher - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 4:43 pm:
==I am pro choice
But think there should be limits ==
Lots and lots of people would say that you’re not pro choice.
- Blue Dog - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 4:46 pm:
reading the comments since 6 a.m. and I’m struck by the anger. I get all the individual rights arguments. I really do. but those who truly believe that abortion is wrong based on when life begins have an equally compelling argument. our two party system stinks because it doesn’t allow for respect of someone else’s opinion.
- Glenn - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 4:49 pm:
The election of two presidents, George W. Bush and Donald Trump, not by a popular election, but by the Electoral College, has made this possible.
What a terrible consequence of an attempt to prevent tyranny of the many, making instead a tyranny of the few.
There are 50 Senators in Congress from the 25 least populous states, the population of which totals about the same as two, California and Illinois combined, that have only four Senators.
CNN on Monday night claimed that the five justices in favor of overruling Roe were Bush 43 appointee Alito, Bush 41 appointee Clarence Thomas, and three Trump appointees (Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett), while Chief Justice Roberts, appointed by Bush 43, is prepared to uphold the constitutionality of Mississippi’s abortion law without overruling Roe.
- Jibba - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 5:23 pm:
===it doesn’t allow for respect of someone else’s opinion.===
With respect, there is only one side wanting to tell the other side what to do here. That’s the crux of it for me. I find that religious folks often want to tell me what I am allowed to do with my life rather than simply leading their own as they see fit.
- Blue Dog - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 6:04 pm:
Jibba. The other side may argue that it’s not only your life that is impacted.
- Socially DIstant watcher - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 6:30 pm:
@Blue Dog:. Once to every man and nation / comes a moment to decide…
It’s deeply personal. For both sides. But only one side will be happy with the outcome. So yeah; a whole lot of anger.
- Roadrager - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 6:30 pm:
I, too, am struck by the harshness of the discourse over taking away the bodily autonomy of half the U.S. population after a five-decade campaign that included death threats, bombings, and assassinations. Whatever happened to civility, like screaming at a woman and calling her names as she walked into a health clinic?
As for “the other side” arguing that not only one life is impacted, guess what happens to all of us when more children are carried to term by parents who do not possess the desire and/or ability to raise them.
- Blue Dog - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 6:35 pm:
road ranger. some might argue the key word in your comment is children.
- Anti-Trump Republican - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 9:26 pm:
While it is completely irrelevant Constitutionally whether or not a President received a popular vote victory, the fact the remains that both of President George W. Bush’s nominees to the Court (who may be on different sides on the broader issue) were picked after the 2004 election in which George W. Bush won a majority of the popular vote.
- Glenn - Tuesday, May 3, 22 @ 10:04 pm:
==While it is completely irrelevant Constitutionally whether or not a President received a popular vote victory==
This Constitutional”irrelevancy” is a tragedy for the people who must live under its arbitrary rule, as a people whose control over their own lives is lost to the dictates of a minority.