ROE FALLS.
“The five-vote majority needed in the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey remains intact months after Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s leaked draft majority opinion was written, according to a report.
The leaked draft majority opinion penned by Alito is dated February 10 and has almost certainly changed multiple times in the almost three months since it was written, but three conservative sources close to the Court say that the votes supporting the decision remain unchanged, according to reporting from the Washington Post.
The justices set to join Alito’s opinion include Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. …”
I stand corrected.
The conservative legal movement isn’t a complete joke.
Who is the leaker? My money says one of three possibilities in likely order: a queer, or a white woman who spent her entire schooling in a heavily jewish suburb somewhere on one of the coasts.
Why did my Mac delete the most important part of my comment? Should read… Who is the leaker? My money says one of three possibilities in likely order: a jew, a queer, or a white woman who spent her entire schooling in a heavily jewish suburb somewhere on one of the coasts.
John Roberts is the new Anthony Kennedy, it would seem. Haven’t trusted that coward since he failed to support Arizona, Sheriff Joe, and the SB 1070 law back in 2012. Frankly, I was also pissed that he was the swing vote which failed to strike down the individual mandate in Obamacare.
Maybe ZOG has woken up to the fact that aborted goyim cannot fight and die in Zionist wars? Or are they just throwing conservatives a bone to shut them up and keep them on the Republican plantation? One thing is for sure, women who want an abortion will still be able to get one.
Whether the next domino turns out to be affirmative action, and maybe after that ‘marriage equality’, the biggest domino of all is the national security surveillance state, including a permanent wartime economy.
But regarding (the pending decision about) affirmative action:
Disparate Impact’ — Part 4 — How yet more public policies have become dysfunctional under threat of “disparate impact” lawsuits
In the three previous essays in this series I’ve described how ‘disparate impact’ legal claims have been used to threaten with lawsuits those who simply apply neutral rules, whenever the application of those neutral rules don’t result in outcomes in strict proportion to national racial demographic statistics. Indeed, a large variety of policies have been rendered dysfunctional under the threat of lawsuits based on claims of ‘disparate impact.’
Vulcan Society v FDNY was a notable case where ‘disparate impact’ was decisive, resulting in a de facto racial quota system governing FDNY hiring — the decision in Griggs v Duke Power is often cited as the basis for the application of ‘disparate impact’ — it was decided by 7 of the 9 judges who decided Roe v Wade — so Griggs v Duke Power must go in order to expose the whole ‘diversity’ fraud — disparate impact has been the legal sledgehammer behind the push for ‘diversity’.