Republicans- The Masters Of Strategic Dishonesty
Remember, it's only "lying" if you're a Democrat
(h/t to Pat Bagley)
Remember when precedent meant something? When “settled law” was respected by those prospective Supreme Court justices answering questions before the Senate Judiciary Committee?
“Senator, Roe v. Wade is settled law…. (or something close to it)” And it sounded is if they MEANT it?
Remember that? And do you recall hearing that from Justices Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and Barrett during their confirmation hearings? I can’t speak to what Justice Clarence Thomas said on the matter. After all, his dour visage has darkened the Court (and I’m NOT referring to his skin color) since Jesus Christ was a Cub Scout. Finally, let’s not forget Samuel Alito, who, left to his own devices, would’ve turned America into Gilead by now.
What I’m talking about is that three, possibly four, Supreme Court justices LIED during their confirmation hearings when questioned about how they’d voted on overturning Roe v. Wade. Those answers are a matter of public record, yet there will almost certainly be no reckoning for their blatant dishonesty under oath. They perjured themselves, and yet we can count on there being no movement to hold them accountable for their astounding and impactful dissembling.
I don’t think I’m being disingenuous in saying this, but if the justices in question were Democrats, you can bet that Republicans would already have gallows constructed on the mall in front of the Supreme Court. The lynch mobs would be barely containable.
Yet, because Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Barrett, Thomas, and Samuel Alito are Republicans, the response to their prevarications is a collective “Meh…so they’re Republicans; they get a free pass. At least they’re not Democrats, right??”
The temptation is to invoke all the worst of “The Handmaid’s Tale” imagery that comes to mind, and you could be forgiven for allowing your mind to wander off in that direction. That’s not an inevitable destination, though if good people stand by and do nothing to stop the evil, that might be the final stop on this train ride to Hell.
Because as of Friday,
people in the 13 states with "trigger laws" (to ban abortion as soon as the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade) were lined up outside of abortion clinics, waiting for their appointments, hoping to exercise their right (yes it is still a right) to control their reproductive futures, and the workers had to turn them away as soon as the ruling hit. The terror they must have felt is unimaginable.
The reason I am only giving myself five minutes of vindictiveness is because this means we have to work. We have to work to ensure those people in those lines are not forced to give birth. We have to work to get people out of these states. In the meantime, however — fuck Kavanaugh, fuck Barrett, fuck Alito, fuck Thomas, fuck Gorsuch, fuck Roberts, and especially fuck Susan Collins.
The assholes who wanted this have remained under the impression that the only people who are going to be affected by this are selfish bitches they don't know, who so rudely want more for themselves than a life of being barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, who will be "cured" of this evil desire by being forced to give birth. They're going to find that they are very wrong.
An important thing to consider is that this is not just terrifying and dangerous for those seeking abortion care. They are not the only people who will be affected. The states that have these trigger laws, the states that will otherwise outlaw abortion? They're the states with the highest maternal mortality rates. They are the states with the biggest doctor shortages. It is already hard to get doctors to move to rural areas, in part because hospitals in those areas don't pay them enough to be able to pay off their exorbitant student loans. The vast majority of doctors are pro-choice, the majority of ob-gyns are pro-choice. It's going to be pretty fucking hard to get them to move to a place where they, their spouses, their children would have to forfeit their reproductive rights.
People are going to die as a result of this decision and that number will not be limited to those who need abortions.
This is very clearly a case of the Law of Unintended Consequences looking for a place and time to strut its stuff. People WILL die, and the impact on healthcare, while as yet unknown, could be substantial and far-ranging.
While the anti-choice folks celebrate, they don’t yet fully understand the consequences of their “victory.” And that “victory” may well be Pyrrhic in nature, which is fine, I suppose, if all you care about is abortion. But if you live in a rural area and the nearest doctor is 2-3 hours away, today’s “victory” won’t ease the shortage of doctors and other healthcare professionals.
And, just when the credibility of the Supreme Court was sinking to new lows, the Conservative majority has made it clear that the Court is no longer a nonpartisan body. Instead, it’s a servant of the Conservative agenda, hip-deep in the culture wars the Far-Right is waging, with the Court wielding the ultimate legal weapon.
Even worse, Justice Clarence Thomas wants to take a sledgehammer to virtually all precedents with which he disagrees.
Yes, Justice Thomas believes the Court should revisit rulings establishing protections for same-sex marriage and contraception. And perhaps more once he gets wound up.
It’s almost as if Justice Thomas is trying to move America back to 1955.
Justice Clarence Thomas argued in a concurring opinion released on Friday that the Supreme Court “should reconsider” its past rulings codifying rights to contraception access, same-sex relationships and same-sex marriage.
The sweeping suggestion from the current court’s longest-serving justice came in the concurring opinion he authored in response to the court’s ruling revoking the constitutional right to abortion, also released on Friday.
In his concurring opinion, Thomas — an appointee of President George H.W. Bush — wrote that the justices “should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell” — referring to three cases having to do with Americans’ fundamental privacy, due process and equal protection rights.
Silly me; I’d always thought that the Supreme Court was supposed to be the impartial arbiter of the law and blind to color, race, ethnicity, social status, or the contents of one’s bank account.
It turns out that the Court, at least in the hands of the current 6-3 Conservative majority, is an instrument for securing and representing the interests of the Conservative White Christian heterosexual patriarchy. Except for Clarence Thomas, the Conservatives on the Court are all White and Ivy League-educated. They’re all cut from the same cloth, so it’s no surprise whose interests they represent. The surprise lies in how open and shameless they are in their representation of that patriarchy.
Since early May, when POLITICO published a leaked draft of the Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, Democrats have warned that such a decision would, in effect, be a shot across the bow of women’s rights. Moreover, they cautioned that Conservatives would be coming after other individual rights once they got some wind in their sails.
If Conservatives on the Court succeed in rolling back same-sex marriage and protections for contraception, what will they go after next? Once they get a taste of success, will they continue looking to nibble away at other individual rights? Will they continue to narrow the scope of the 1st Amendment? Or broaden the definition of the 2nd Amendment? The possibilities are frightening to consider because it’s virtually impossible to exert any accountability upon the Supreme Court. With lifetime sinecures and no formalized process for removing justices save for impeachment, the Court can almost literally do what it wants.
Will America become the home of the frightened and the land of the less than free in our lifetimes? It’s beginning to look as if that might be the case, and I don’t think I’m being alarmist in raising that prospect. If six dishonest Conservatives can overturn Roe v. Wade, what other damage might they inflict?
Stay tuned. You’re probably not going to like the answer.
Dammit...! "Simply," not "Dimply." The letters are wearing off my keyboard!
What you wrote here is troubling enough... but it's actually far worse.
When Clarence Thomas publicly says that same-sex marriage and contraception should be next on the chopping block, his hypocrisy is friggin' waist-deep. What he DIDN'T mention was that mixed-race marriage was ALSO based on the "constitutional right to privacy." That would be awkward, because his wife is white.
Dimply because of his statements, he should be forced to recuse himself on any cases based on this issue. He has shown himself to be biased before any such case domes before the court. He should actually be impeached, for these statements and his knowledge of his wife's work to overthrow the 2020 election.
The recent decision in Miranda cases to remove the ability of people to hold government officials accountable, and the decision against sensible gun laws in New York also posit an horrific future for this country.
Now Republicans are falling all over each other, congratulating themselves for these "wins," but it will be funny to watch when they realize that "no protection of privacy" means the government can inspect and enumerate your gun cache, that the police can spy on your phone without a warrant, and more. I can't wait for the "But, but, but... We didn't mean it THAT way."
Fuck with American democracy, suffer consequences. 75% of Americans think Roe should have been left alone. (PS- They vote.)
I see also that after about 2 years, "Q" is back to rile up the uneducated, pushing his MAGA vision. Thing is, in a right and proper world, Trump will be in the docket on election day, if not already wearing prison orange.
I presently weep for the future of democracy in America as we know it, but there IS still hope.