But for this thread, the real question is who gets to set that standard—who gets to decide when a baby becomes an actual person—and IMHO the Constitution clearly gives that to the states rather than the Federal government and certainly not nine unelected justices.
Well two points. I agree that abortion should be an issue handled by the states after a point. Should women have the right to an abortion? They are the majority. If they want legal abortion in their state let them vote for it. I would hope they would vote for the kinds of government programs that would make it easier and desirable for women to want to keep their babies but there is little evidence that they will.
Though it would be interesting to see how the justices would react to Congress giving US citizenship—and all the rights that go with that status—to babies from the moment of conception...
It would be an interesting thing. It is a reasonable place to start a long-needed debate. It would extend to some kinds of birth control also; most notably the so-called morning after pill.
One thing is certain. Using current statistics, the banning of abortion will dramatically increase the browning of America. It puzzles me that many on the right seem to have failed to figure this out. Whites represent the lowest percentage of abortions/population while blacks the highest by about 3X. In 2017, in the 27 states that report such numbers, there were 280,000 white abortions and 295,000 black abortions. On color lines it was 280,000 white abortions and 571,000 POC abortions. It is laudable that so many republicans embrace this browning of America. One might have concluded that we are racist but as we are the anti-abortion party, clearly we are not.
@Pants-of-dog Like I said, the massive amounts of funding she received and her outspoken religious beliefs are why she should recuse herself.
So I understand that you want an atheism test for judges? Do you want to exclude from public office and the judiciary, all of these who are devoutly religious people? Should Ruth Bader Ginsburg have been censured or recuse herself from the debate on woman's rights because she coauthored (with a Rabbi) an article entitled, "The Heroic and Visionary Women of Passover"? She was raised a conservative Jew and taught at Jewish summer camps until she left for college.
As for funding, I am with you if we are to take all of the money out of politics. We can't, we will not so that is a moot point. There is nothing to be gained by your mentioning it.
But she will not. And this is how large churches and other groups can openly pay for judicial activism that suits them.
Do you have some evidence of her religiously inspired judicial activism in her previous roles as a judge? She claims to be an originalist and consequently (wrongly* but ardently) eschews what she considers judicial activism on those grounds.
Barrett has spoken out on this subject time and again. She testified before congress saying, " “The policy decisions and value judgments of government must be made by the political branches elected by and accountable to the People.”
This clearly points out two important beliefs on her part. First that she opposed judicial activism and secondly that she believes that the court is NOT "accountable to the people". So what remains appears to be a jurist who believes that courts are accountable to the law and that the Supreme Court is accountable to the constitution.
So again POD. Where is your evidence that ACB is interested at all in judicial activism, or has acted on it before? And where is your evidence that a judge holding strong religious beliefs as RBG did, is a bad thing and inconsistent with good Jurisprudence?
It is my opinion that the term judicial activism is most frequently used by the loser to denigrate any judge whose legal opinion becomes inconvenient.
Let me further point out that there are many established legal experts on both sides of the argument who find Roe V. Wade to be a bad decision.
*The founders embraced judicial activism and expected judges to make laws through the mechanism of embracing common law. 12 states still do.