The Seditious ‘Oath Keepers’

Since 6 January there has been a focus on the real reason for the militia known as the Oath Keepers…..for years they presented themselves as the ‘protectors’ of the Constitution and country…..since the insurrection their alleged reason for existence has become more clear…..

The federal courthouse in Washington, DC heard dramatic opening arguments Monday in the most serious Capitol riot case yet—the seditious conspiracy trial against Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes and four of his lieutenants. The right-wing militia members are accused of plotting to prevent Congress’ certification of President Biden’s election victory “by any means necessary,” including violence. In his opening statement, assistant US Attorney Jeffrey Nestler said the “core democratic custom” of a transfer of power goes back to the time of George Washington, CNN reports. “These defendants tried to change that history,” he said. “They concocted a plan for armed rebellion to shatter a bedrock of American democracy.” He says Rhodes began plotting to overturn Biden’s win days after the 2020 election.

The defendants, Nestler said, planned to attack “not just the Capitol, not just our government, not just DC, but our country itself.” Prosecutors said Rhodes acted “like a general,” remaining outside the Capitol as his “troops” breached the building on Jan. 6, 2021, Politico reports. Prosecutors said the group stockpiled weapons at a Virginia hotel for a “Quick Reaction Force” and discussed using boats to bring them across the Potomac River to DC. The other four defendants are Kelly Meggs, leader of the Florida chapter of the Oath Keepers, Florida member Kenneth Harrelson, retired US Navy intelligence officer Thomas Caldwell, and Ohio militia leader Jessica Watkins, the AP reports. Nestler played video of Oath Keepers members inside the Capitol, where some tried to find House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Defense lawyers have argued that the Oath Keepers went to DC to provide security for figures including Roger Stone, and they were only at the Capitol because they expected then-President Donald Trump would invoke the Insurrection Act and use them to stop what they considered a Democratic coup, the Washington Post reports. Nestler said Rhodes, a Yale Law School graduate, tried to use the Insurrection Act as “magic words” to justify illegal acts. Phillip Linder, Rhodes’ attorney, argued in his opening statement that the Oath Keepers “did nothing illegal” and they “are not a violent group.”

Let me point out….these people are still in the process of a trial….as it is they are accused not convicted….

Throw the book at these bastards!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Advertisement

SCOTUS Docket For The New Session

The docket is being set for the new session of the Supreme Court……is there any surprises?

The Supreme Court opens its new term Monday, hearing arguments for the first time after a summer break and with new Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. Already the court has said it will decide cases on a range of major issues including affirmative action, voting rights, and the rights of LGBTQ people. The justices will add more cases to their docket in the coming months, but here is a look at some of the cases the court has already agreed to hear, per the AP. The justices are expected to decide each of the cases before taking a summer break at the end of June:

  • Affirmative action: In cases from Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, the court could end any consideration of race in college admissions. If this seems familiar, it’s because the high court has been asked repeatedly over the past 20 years to end affirmative action in higher education. In previous cases from Michigan and Texas, the court reaffirmed the validity of considering college applicants’ race among many factors. But this court is more conservative than those were.
  • Voting rights: The court could further reduce protections for minority voters in its third major consideration in 10 years of the landmark Voting Rights Act, which was enacted to combat enduring racial discrimination in voting. The case the justices are hearing involves Alabama, where just one of the state’s seven congressional districts has a Black majority. That’s even though 27% of the state’s residents are Black. A ruling for the state could wipe away all but the most obvious cases of intentional discrimination on the basis of race.
  • Elections: Republicans are asking the justices to embrace a novel legal concept that would limit state courts’ oversight of elections for Congress. North Carolina’s top court threw out the state’s congressional map that gave Republicans a lopsided advantage in a closely divided state and eventually came up with a map that basically evenly divided the state’s 14 congressional districts between Democrats and Republicans. The state GOP argues that state courts have no role to play in congressional elections because the US Constitution gives that power to state legislatures alone. Four conservative justices have expressed varying levels of openness to the “independent state legislature” theory.
  • Clean water: This is yet another case in which the court is being asked to discard an earlier ruling and loosen the regulation of property under the nation’s chief law to combat water pollution. The case involves an Idaho couple who won an earlier high court round in their bid to build a house on property near a lake without getting a permit under the Clean Water Act. The outcome could change the rules for millions of acres of property that contain wetlands.
  • Immigration: The Biden administration is back at the Supreme Court to argue for a change in immigration policy from the Trump administration. It’s appealing a ruling against a Biden policy prioritizing deportation of people in the country illegally who pose the greatest public safety risk. Last term, the justices by a 5-4 vote paved the way for the administration to end the Trump policy that required asylum-seekers to wait in Mexico for their court hearing. In July, also by a 5-4 vote, the high court refused to allow the administration to implement policy guidance for deportations. A Trump-era policy favored deporting people in the country illegally regardless of criminal history or community ties.
  • LGBTQ rights: A new clash involving religion, free speech, and the rights of LGBTQ people will also be before the justices. The case involves Colorado graphic and website designer Lorie Smith, who wants to expand her business and offer wedding website services. She says her Christian beliefs would lead her to decline any request from a same-sex couple to design a wedding website, however, and that puts her in conflict with a Colorado anti-discrimination law. The case is a new chance for the justices to confront issues the court skirted five years ago in a case about a baker objected to making cakes for same-sex weddings.
  • Art world: The court’s resolution of a dispute involving pieces by artist Andy Warhol could have big consequences in the art world and beyond. If the Warhol side loses a copyright dispute involving an image Warhol made of the musician Prince, other artworks could be in peril, lawyers say. But the other side says if Warhol wins, it would be a license for other artists to blatantly copy.

A full docket and the chance for SCOTUS to continue to chip away at our rights and privileges.

Anything new here?

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Lock The Bastards Up!

A departure from my usual Sunday posts….but this is just too important to wait for later….

This country is choke full of a/holes that steal from people that truly need assistance…..the pandemic was no different.

Greed is just too string for some to resist.

The ‘pandemic crimes unit’ is fully investigating all sorts of theft of pandemic funds to be used to help the people and businesses cope with the lack of income in the trying times……

The federal government has a revised estimate of the amount of money the US unemployment insurance program lost through fraud during the pandemic: $45.6 billion. Criminals collected the money between March 2020 and April 2022 through such tactics as using the Social Security numbers of dead people, CNN reports. The estimate released Thursday by the Labor Department’s inspector general replaces the one issued a year ago of about $16 billion, per the Washington Post. Kevin Chambers, who leads pandemic-related enforcement for the Justice Department, called the findings “unprecedented fraud.”

The government distributed the money to businesses and individuals to try to strengthen the economy during the coronavirus outbreak. President Donald Trump approved $3.1 trillion in funding in 2020 and President Biden another $1.9 trillion in 2021. Unemployment fraud was so widespread that federal investigators have barely made a dent two years into the process, per the New York Times. The government announced Thursday it has now charged 1,000 people with crimes related to jobless benefits committed during the pandemic. Hundreds of people are working on fraud cases in the offices of 21 inspectors general, and other agencies are involved. President Biden last month signed legislation doubling the statute of limitations to 10 years for some pandemic-related fraud, promising thieves that the government will find them.

The hero of Mississippi, Brett Favre, is one of those creeps that in on the theft of pandemic funds…..he too needs to be locked up but will not….he will skate as he always has in the past.

These people, if found guilty, need to made to pay a heavy price for their disregard of the needs of those in trouble during the pandemic.

Enjoy your Sunday….be well and be safe…..

“lego ergo scribo”

That Pesky Affidavit

Know it is Sunday and I try to avoid the ‘news’ for happier or informative things….in that light this post is an FYI post…..

Well the social media sights are burning up with opinions on whether this raid on Mar-a-Lago was valid or not.

This post is about the affidavit…..

The Justice Department released its blacked-out version of the Mar-a-Lago affidavit Friday afternoon, and news outlets were scrambling to make sense of what could be read. In the affidavit, the department argued that the FBI search had to be conducted because a batch of documents retrieved from the Florida residence in January contained an alarming amount of classified information—14 of 15 boxes had documents with classified markings, reports the AP—and they were sure more were still at the residence. Coverage:

  • Read the redacted affidavit yourself here.
  • The department said the material retrieved in January included top-secret information obtained by “clandestine human resources” who were monitoring “foreign communications signals,” per theHill. If such information got into the wrong hands, it could compromise spies and their intel-gathering operations, said the affidavit.
  • How did the department know that Trump had classified documents at Mar-a-Lago? Through “a significant number of civilian witnesses.”
  • The affidavit asserted that “there is also probable cause to believe that evidence of obstruction will be found” at the residence, per the Washington Post.
  • Trump spokesperson Taylor Budowich declared in a statement that “this is a grave travesty, and what is unredacted only further supports President Trump’s position, there was NO reason for a raid—it is all politics!” Trump himself is using the familiar phrase “witch hunt,” per the New York Post.
  • In terms of specifics, the affidavit said the boxes retrieved from Mar-a-Lago in January by the National Archives contained 184 classified documents—”25 of which were marked ‘top secret,’ 92 of which were marked ‘secret,’ and 67 of which were marked ‘confidential’—the lowest level of national security classification,” per Politico. Some of the “highly classified records were unfoldered, intermixed with other records, and otherwise unproperly [sic] identified,” the affidavit said.
  • In assessing the January batch, FBI agents “were most alarmed to discover that many of the materials included the highest national security restrictions, requiring they be held in controlled government storage facilities, and barring them from ever being shared with foreign governments,” per the New York Times.
  • On the first page of the affidavit, an FBI agent summed things up: “The government is conducting a criminal investigation concerning the improper removal and storage of classified information in unauthorized spaces, as well as the unlawful concealment or removal of government records.”

Below is the affidavit for those that did not read the above part of this post…..

https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/26/politics/mar-a-lago-search-warrant-affidavit-memo/index.html

Documents already made public show the FBI retrieved from the property 11 sets of classified documents, including information marked at the top secret level. They also show that federal agents are investigating potential violations of three federal laws, including one that governs gathering, transmitting, or losing defense information under the Espionage Act. The other statutes address the concealment, mutilation, or removal of records and the destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations. Trump and his backers have maintained that he had the authority as president to declassify any documents he removed from the White House.

Hopefully this will help clear any misunderstandings there has been around this document.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Remember When Comic Books Were Dangerous?

No?

Well time for the Old Professor to drop some history.

These days comic books are a great source of entertainment and collecting them has become mainstream.

But it was not always so acceptable to read or collect these treasures.

Like today when some blame society’s ills on video games and music so it was that comics were accused as the source of juvenile delinquency in the 1950s.

Comic books are successful almost from their inception in the early 1930s, but also subject to attack by critics for the low quality of the art and writing, and for the emphasis on violent stories and images. These attacks come from adult critics, not the millions of monthly comics readers — mainly children and teenagers who love the vivid illustrations and exciting stories in the books.

After World War II, readership dwindles for popular superhero titles, such as Superman, Wonder Woman, and The Spirit, and many comics turn to gory, true-life stories, or tales of horror and the supernatural. E.C. Comics’ Vault of Horror, Crypt of Terror, and Haunt of Fear cram their pages with severed heads, drug use, and graphic violence. Some of the most popular of these extreme stories come from the pen of comic artist Jack Cole.

Throughout the decade, attacks against the violent comics mount. Citizens’ groups and religious organizations pressure publishers and news dealers to drop the most offensive lines. Newspaper editorial pages and national magazines debate the influence of comics on the young.

In 1954 the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency holds hearings on whether comic books inspire juvenile delinquency. A lead witness, psychologist Dr. Frederick Wertham, testifies that comics “create a mental readiness for temptation” and create “an atmosphere of deceit and cruelty” for children. He even attacks Superman for “arousing fantasies of sadistic joy in seeing others punished while you yourself remain immune.”

E.C. Comics publisher William Gaines speaks in the comics defense, emphasizing his stories’ endings, in which the criminals always pay for their crimes. “Good taste” is his only criterion. Senator Estes Kefauver asks if an E.C. Comics’ cover displaying a woman’s severed head and a bloody axe is Gaines’ idea of good taste. Backed into a corner, Gaines boldly answers ‘yes.’ The exchange makes the front page of the next day’s New York Times.

The committee’s subsequent report declares no proven connection between comics and delinquency. Nevertheless, the Senate calls for self-regulation by the comics industry to keep violent titles out of young hands. Seeking to diffuse the negative publicity, the comic book publishers create The Comics Magazine Association of America. The new trade group publishes a strict code of guidelines to control what content the comics will permit. The guidelines focus exclusively on crime and horror comics. Within a short time, the genre is no longer commercially viable.

The imposition of the Comic Book Code bankrupts many of the horror and crime publishers, and many of the artists and writers leave the business for good. The most notable failure is E.C. Comics,

I always wonder why the dialog in the early comics was so horribly bad….like it was written by a 4 year old on Zanax……now you know.

Class Dismissed!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

That Espionage Act

2022 gave the American public some shiny objects to chase….the Russian invasion of Ukraine…..a mass shooting in Uvalde…..the abortion ruling by SCOTUS and now the FBI raid on Trump’s Mar a Lago property.

With the latest raid on the property of ex-president Trump there has been more focus on the Espionage Act because of the documents that were allegedly found at the president’s Mar a Lago property.

What is the Espionage Act?

Espionage Act essentially made it a crime for any person to convey information intended to interfere with the U.S. armed forces prosecution of the war effort or to promote the success of the country’s enemies. Anyone found guilty of such acts would be subject to a fine of $10,000 and a prison sentence of 20 years.

The Espionage Act was reinforced by the Sedition Act of the following year, which imposed similarly harsh penalties on anyone found guilty of making false statements that interfered with the prosecution of the war; insulting or abusing the U.S. government, the flag, the Constitution or the military; agitating against the production of necessary war materials; or advocating, teaching or defending any of these acts.

That brings us to the FBI raid on the Trump property in Florida.

After a week punctuated with reprimands of the Department of Justice by Republican lawmakers and their subsequent demands for accountability following an FBI search of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence, the search warrant released Friday indicates the search was conducted in connection with, among other things, the Espionage Act.

The Espionage Act is actually a series of statutes under 18 US Code Chapter 37 related to the collection, retention, or dissemination of national defense or classified information. The Mar-a-Lago search warrant referred to Section 793 — “Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information,” which doesn’t just cover “spying” in the sense that many think of when they hear the term. Section 793 specifically states that people legally granted access to national defense documents — people like the former president — are subject to punishment should they improperly retain that information.

Under the Presidential Records Act, which relates to the retention of government documents by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), official documents and other material or information a president or a vice president may have obtained while in office must go to NARA for preservation.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/8/13/23304194/the-espionage-act-trump-documents-mar-a-lago

For over a week now Trump supporters have been losing their minds over this raid.

The back and forth will continue because it makes great fodder for the upcoming election.

More to come I am sure.

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Trump On The Wire

More real news for this Saturday.

The latest episode of Trump Reality Show has him being invaded by the FBI in his golf course palace……the reasons for the raid have been debated in the social media sites…..that does not matter….what matters is what the FBI found in the raid….

A list compiled by the FBI shows agents took 11 sets of classified documents from Mar-a-Lago after searching former President Donald Trump’s home Monday, including some labeled top secret and sensitive. About 20 boxes were removed, reports the Wall Street Journal, whose reporters have seen the three-page list. Among the items logged were photo binders, Roger Stone’s grant of clemency, and information about the “President of France.” The warrant signed by a judge was included with the list, showing that agents wanted to search the estate’s “45 Office” and all storage rooms where boxes of documents could be kept, in any of the buildings on the property.

Trump’s lawyers say he declassified documents while he was still in office, though federal regulations require that a process be followed. “The Biden administration is in obvious damage control after their botched raid where they seized the president’s picture books, a ‘hand written note,’ and declassified documents,” said Trump spokesman Taylor Budowich. Some files were marked “Various classified/TS/SCI documents,” which indicates top-secret/sensitive compartmented information. Such documents usually are to be reviewed in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility by personnel with special clearance.

The FBI documents indicate the agency is looking into whether Trump violated the Espionage Act, a review by Politico shows. Other potential charges involve removal or destruction of records and obstruction of an investigation, the warrant says, which are punishable by fines and prison terms. The Justice Department’s original intent was to secure the documents after Trump failed to turn them over, per the Journal. The agency shifted to a criminal investigation when investigators grew concerned that Trump aides were being evasive about the files.

If the accusations are true then Trump needs to be arrested and thrown under the jail…..I mean leaving top secret docs lying around some stodgy golf course is a reach of the secrets act….time to make this dullard pay for his arrogance and stupidity.

Just a thought

I will return your weekend of worthless news back next Saturday….sorry for the interruption.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Closing Thought–27Jul22

With the recent rulings by those political hacks on SCOTUS the public is started to see just how worthless and owned the Court has become…..it has lost all respect by the majority of the people.

Many of us have been calling for term limits on judges for a long time….a lifetime job gives them way too much power.

About 2 in 3 Americans say they favor term limits or a mandatory retirement age for Supreme Court justices, according to a new poll that finds a sharp increase in the percentage of Americans saying they have “hardly any” confidence in the court, the AP reports. The poll from the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds 67% of Americans support a proposal to set a specific number of years that justices serve instead of life terms, including 82% of Democrats and 57% of Republicans. Views are similar about a requirement that justices retire by a specific age.

The poll was conducted just weeks after the high court issued high-profile rulings including stripping away women’s constitutional protections for abortion and expanding gun rights. The poll also shows more Americans disapprove than approve of the court’s abortion decision, with just over half saying the decision made them “angry” or “sad.” In the prior poll, conducted in April before a draft of the court’s Roe v. Wade decision was leaked, 18% said they had a great deal of confidence, 54% said they had only some and 27% said they had hardly any. Now, 17% say they have a great deal of confidence, 39% only some, and 43% hardly any.

Of course being an opinionated SOB I had stuff to say about SCOTUS…..

I Have Lots To Say About SCOTUS

I see the rest of society is started seeing (finally) that SCOTUS is a rigged game and that something needs to be done…..and soon.

Right on cue the Dems after the poll came out have introduced a new bill…..

A group of House Democrats introduced a bill on Tuesday to enact term limits for Supreme Court justices, arguing that the move will “restore legitimacy and independence to the nation’s highest court.”

The legislation, titled the Supreme Court Tenure Establishment and Retirement Modernization Act, would authorize the president to nominate Supreme Court justices every two years — in the first and third years after a presidential election. The justices who have been on the court the longest will be moved to senior status first.

If confirmed by the Senate, those individuals would serve a maximum 18 years on the bench. After their tenures are complete, the Supreme Court justices would retire from active service and assume senior status.

Justices on the bench at the time of the bill’s enactment would switch to senior status one by one as justices are confirmed to the bench in the first and third years after a presidential election.

Under senior status, justices will still hold their office on the Supreme Court, which includes official duties and pay. If the number of justices dips below nine at some point — because of a vacancy, disability or disqualification — the justice who most recently attained senior status would serve as the ninth associate justice.

(thehill.com)

Were they paying attention to the people’s wants or is it electioneering?

I am suspicious of the timing of the bill….after all the Dems are not looking good for 2022….were they trying to find a leg up for the upcoming campaigns?

Please say what is on your mind.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Is SCOTUS The Final Word?

It is a common thought that all is lost when SCOTUS makes its decisions for they have the final word.

Is that necessarily true?

When the Supreme Court was holding oral arguments last December in the case that brought about the end of Roe v. Wade, Justice Sonia Sotomayor addressed the familiar argument that the Constitution doesn’t mention a right to privacy. That fact was a central argument in the court’s majority opinion issued last month, per NPR. But there’s a lot that’s not mentioned in the Constitution, the justice said. In fact, “there is not anything in the Constitution that says that the Court, the Supreme Court, is the last word on what the Constitution means,” Sotomayor pointed out. “And yet, she added, “what the Court did was reason from the structure of the Constitution that that’s what was intended.”

The justice might have been mostly intending to say that rights, including the one to privacy, can exist without being clearly stated in the Constitution, but Joshua Zeitz writes in an opinion piece in Politico that the power of judicial review is in the same boat. “Both exist by strong implication,” he says. Mostly, the court claimed that right for itself. Some framers did expect the Supreme Court, as well as lower federal courts, to exercise a veto on constitutional grounds over congressional and state acts, Zeitz writes. “But they did not intend this power to be unchecked or unlimited,” he says.

The Constitution is all about checks and balances, and the other branches could move to limit the judiciary just as the courts limit the activities of the others. The Constitution didn’t even design the court system, it left it to the other branches. So they can take steps to restrict the court on certain issues, Zeitz points out. Congress could pass a law denying the court authority over a new voting rights act, for example. “Ultimately, it is the responsibility and prerogative of the executive and legislative branches to encourage greater restraint and humility on the part of the judiciary,” Zeitz writes.

You can read the full piece here.

I have my doubts about this pronouncement…..why?

The US Congress is a toothless tiger.  It is so wrapped up in the mundane crap trying to find a consensus (at least one party is)….nothing will be done for SCOTUS is about political agenda and not what is best for this nation.

And of course there are opinions on how to ‘fix’ the Supreme Court….here are a few (my thoughts later)…..

The Supreme Court’s just-concluded term was a bacchanalia of reactionary indulgence. Roe v. Wade is dead. Gun laws throughout the nation are now in peril. The Court is pummeling the wall separating church and state — and it isn’t afraid to tell easily disprovable falsehoods to achieve this goal. The Court’s GOP-appointed majority curtailed the EPA’s power to fight climate change, and gave themselves an open-ended veto power over any federal regulation.

It’s likely that the worst is yet to come. Three “shadow docket” decisions this past term suggest that the Court is about to slash safeguards against racial gerrymandering. Another case looming in the next term, involving North Carolina’s gerrymandered congressional maps, is likely to give Republican state legislatures the power to defy their state constitution when writing election laws. And that’s after the Court has spent the last decade dismantling the Voting Rights Act and stripping the federal courts of any authority to fight partisan gerrymanders.

The Court’s Republican majority isn’t simply handing down bold conservative policy decrees, it is undermining democracy itself.

But just because court reform isn’t currently politically viable doesn’t mean it’s not worth considering, especially if Democrats somehow manage to pick up larger majorities in a future Congress. There are several options to deal with an increasingly partisan Supreme Court. Here are 10 of them.

https://www.vox.com/23186373/supreme-court-packing-roe-wade-voting-rights-jurisdiction-stripping

My thoughts on these ‘solutions’…..

Court packing is not viable….not in this political climate.

The Supreme Court lottery….now I can get behind this ‘solution’….

The most talked about ‘solution’ is term limits….another one that I agree with….as long as the Congress limits are included.

Omnibus legislation to overrule the court decisions…..again a good idea but the political climate these days will prevent anything like this idea to see the light of day.

SCOTUS needs reforming and some ideas are good……but as long as the court is run by political hacks all we can do is wish and hope and witness the death of the republic.

Any ideas you would like to share?

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Farewell Roe v Wade

It is 1130 at night and the temp is 109…..it is as miserable as the most recent SCOTUS decision.

The media now has new fodder for their angst…..the shooting in Uvalde has run its course and now the Supreme Court has given them lots of ammo for the next few weeks.

The old farts on the Court have made it mandatory that women become mothers……that women have NO control over their lives unless men say they can……Roe v Wade is now a thing of the past to be taught in history books if the GOP allows it.

Roe v. Wade is no more. The Supreme Court overturned the landmark 1973 ruling that protected abortion rights nationwide in a decision released Friday, reports the AP. The ruling is in sync with a draft opinion that was leaked in May. It’s now up to individual states to decide whether abortions can be provided, and under what restrictions. The New York Times expects the ruling to lead to “all but total” abortion bans in about half the states. Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion, which was joined by Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. Chief Justice John Roberts filed a separate opinion, per SCOTUSblog, in which he agreed with the decision to uphold Mississippi’s abortion law (the case in question) but said he would have preferred “a more measured course” that stopped short of overturning Roe.

  • Majority: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” wrote Alito, referring also to Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a 1992 case that affirmed the Roe decision. “The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision.”
  • And more: “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division,” wrote Alito, per the Washington Post. “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
  • Dissent: “With sorrow—for this Court, but more, for the many millions of American women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection—we dissent,” wrote justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan in a joint dissent.

The case out of Mississippi is Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, No. 19-1392

Here is the statement issued by “Tater Twat” the governor of Mississippi……

RESS RELEASE) – “Mississippi has led the nation to overcome one of the greatest injustices in the history of our country. Our state’s historic case before the United States Supreme Court was the catalyst for overturning Roe v. Wade and has made the nation safer for children than it was just a few short hours ago.

Let’s be clear: this decision will directly result in more hearts beating, more strollers pushed, more report cards given, more little league games played, and more lives well lived. It is a joyous day! Tomorrow, we will wake to a new world, enthusiastically prepared to take on the challenges ahead and to take every step necessary to support mothers and children.

We must remember that our work is not yet over. The pro-life movement must dedicate itself to ensuring mothers and their babies receive the support they both need during pregnancy and after.

Despite what some may claim, Mississippi’s objective was never simply to win a court case – it’s been to create a culture of life across the country.

Our state seeks to be pro-life in every sense of the word – supporting mothers and children through policies of compassion and working to ensure that every baby has a forever family that loves them.

Mississippi will work relentlessly to accomplish these goals and will continue to build a culture that supports mothers and children, valuing the inherent dignity of every individual. This is our new pro-life agenda.

I applaud the Supreme Court Justices for their courage in issuing this well-reasoned decision. It took bravery to stick to the courage of their convictions, especially amidst an unprecedented leak that was aimed at threatening the integrity of the Court, an assassination attempt, riot threats, and attacks on churches and pregnancy centers. No matter one’s party or ideology, we should all be able to condemn these acts.

I pray that Americans will come together, listen to one another, and debate this issue peacefully. Only by moving beyond our divisions and having respectful conversations can we begin to heal this nation’s wounds.

We stand on the shoulders of giants. This win has been achieved thanks to the tireless efforts of so many over decades. Thank you to the lawyers who argued this case for us, passionate citizens who pushed this issue for years, and those who prayed for this day for many decades. I urge my fellow Mississippians to rejoice today and keep praying as the work is not done.

God bless!”

BULLSHIT!

It was always about winning a court case!

The lives of Mississippians will NOT improve as Reeves predicts….but that is okay for he is a Repub and that is all that matters (sarcasm)

Women need to let this go and formulate a new plan of action….bitching about the ruling will change NOTHING.

There is work to be done…..get to it!

But do not take your eyes off the issues for the GOP is not finished removing our rights as citizens….they will be coming and we need to be ready!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”