The Court giveth and the Court taketh away. Blessed be the name of the Court.
Thomas, J., concurring: "In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, & Obergefell."— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) June 24, 2022
I look forward to the takes of those who yelled at people like me for worrying about implications beyond abortion.
Now he's finally with his peeps in his hood.
And this. This is absolutely right. pic.twitter.com/7fzFTUqd7C— Evan Bernick, a finite mode of infinite jest (@evanbernick) June 24, 2022
Golly, it sounds like Justice Thomas wants to use the privileges and immunities clause to expand our rights! That will be swell.— AnyAndAllThingsHat (@Popehat) June 24, 2022
It doesn't exacly fit on a bumper sticker, but expect that to resonate in November.
From the joint dissent in Dobbs: The majority "says that from the very moment of fertilization, a woman has no rights to speak of. A State can force her to bring a pregnancy to term, even at the steepest personal and familial costs."— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) June 24, 2022
"Whatever the exact scope of the coming laws, one result of today’s decision is certain: the curtailment of women’s rights, and of their status as free and equal citizens."— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) June 24, 2022
Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, dissenting in Dobbs.
Fuck around and find out.
from conception https://t.co/ooQEtYcK9v— Jesse Singal (@jessesingal) June 24, 2022
Thanks, Susan Sarandon! This one's for you!
Congratulations to all you idiots who sat out 2016.— Charles P. Pierce (@CharlesPPierce) June 24, 2022
Many criminal defense attorneys are going to need to learn more about pregnancy, as we begin to defend women who miscarry or misbehave while pregnant.— Andrew Fleischman (@ASFleischman) June 24, 2022