Timeline for Durability of Federal legislation protecting abortion rights in US
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 29, 2022 at 1:00 | comment | added | Acccumulation | @LawnmowerMan Going from "This argument is absurd" to "people on the Right wouldn't take this argument seriously" seems like a non sequitur to me. And Prohibition isn't a good analogy, as the federal government has not, in fact, legalized alcohol, it has simply removed the federal ban on it. The states are still free to pass state laws against alcohol. | |
| Jun 29, 2022 at 0:37 | comment | added | DavePhD | @Acccumulation some may consider that the federal government has already legalized abortion via the FDA and pills. | |
| Jun 29, 2022 at 0:25 | comment | added | brainchild | The language of the partial birth-abortion ban is narrowly tailored to remain inside in the constraints on Federal power, which imbues the ban with durability against certain kinds of complaints, but also limits the breadth of individual cases to which it may apply. | |
| Jun 28, 2022 at 17:37 | comment | added | brainchild | @LawnmowerMan, The previous comment is not considering a succession of Congressional legislation, each act toward the opposite effect, but rather two separate hypothetical chronological cases of Congress seeking to unify access across all States, one by a uniform ban, the other by guaranteed access. | |
| Jun 28, 2022 at 15:53 | comment | added | T.E.D. | OK... but where's the evidence that past rulings matter to those particular justices when its inconvenient to a ruling they would like to make today? Roberts seems to care about precedent and the Court's credibility, but they don't need Roberts for their majority. | |
| Jun 28, 2022 at 15:49 | comment | added | eyeballfrog | @LawnmowerMan Legalizing something means banning state legislatures from enacting laws banning it. It's not clear the federal government has that power over the states. | |
| Jun 28, 2022 at 14:36 | comment | added | Chris Loonam | @LawnmowerMan the prohibition example isn’t ideal though since both the ban and its repeal were accomplished through amendments, not legislation | |
| Jun 28, 2022 at 10:56 | comment | added | Lawnmower Man | @Acccumulation it's hard to imagine such an irreflexive power being taken seriously. It would be equivalent to Congress passing Prohibition, but then not being able to lift it, because it only has the power to ban alcohol, not to legalize it. Generally speaking, if the federal gov't has the legal power to ban an activity, it also has the legal power to protect it. | |
| Jun 28, 2022 at 3:25 | comment | added | Acccumulation | That still leaves wriggle room for them to assert that allow the federal government can ban abortion, it can't legalize it. | |
| Jun 28, 2022 at 0:30 | history | answered | DavePhD | CC BY-SA 4.0 |