• @Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    541 month ago

    We’re rapidly sinking into an inescapable hell hole. This is what it looks like to truly have freedoms be taken. It will only get worse from here.

    • @quindraco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      421 month ago

      The law is illegal federally, but unfortunately, the necessity of standing means it can’t be challenged until someone’s on the hook.

      • @conditional_soup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        211 month ago

        And… Well… [Gestures wildly at this SCOTUS]

        I wonder if we slip Thomas a margherita and a twenty if that’ll be enough to buy some influence.

      • @SpaceBishop@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        61 month ago

        Historically, that would be true, but this SCOTUS is wild. Standing doesn’t mean much anymore. Take, for example, the recent ruling from the anti-lgbt web developer in the 303 Creative v Elenis decision. Smith had not started a business at the time the original suit was filed, and, after she had begun operating, shr did not have any requests to make such a wedding site as described in the suit. During an appeal, she provided a false request – for a man already married to a woman – as her standing. Her standing was obviously bullshit; she had none.

        Not that it really helps. Our current SCOTUS will certainly not agree to hear a case that could actually benefit us and defend our civil rights. We should probably start fresh with a new SCOTUS if we want any of that.

  • @LrdThndr@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    461 month ago

    Jesus Christ.

    As a Tennessean… fuck Bill Lee. I’m so sick of this shit.

    My wife damn near died a few years ago when an ectopic pregnancy ruptured. It would have been a wanted child. If this happened today, I’d lose a wife and our two kids would lose a mother.

    Fuck the Republican Party. Fuck anybody who associates with them. Fuck any loser who spouts “both sides” or “genocide Joe” bullshit.

  • @disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    23
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    How is this even defensible? With my biggest stretch of open-mindedness for the ignorant, I can understand the argument that Christians don’t want their taxes funding abortions for those on state aid.

    Slingshot and trafficking laws make it abundantly clear that this is about nothing but control, and I’ve yet to read or hear an argument to the contrary.

    • @pearsaltchocolatebar
      link
      121 month ago

      It also violates the interstate commerce clause of the constitution, but good luck getting the SC to rule against it.