Quote:
Originally Posted by wittynickname
While I'm still pretty well horrified at everything that happened last night (and more and more waves of the repercussions keep hitting me), I got some reassurance today with regards to Roe v Wade. A president cannot just change an old SCOTUS decision, a large case, with new facts and evidence, would have to come before the SCOTUS, and they would have to explain what it was about that case that would supercede the old cases.
It doesn't stop states from furthering their anti-choice platforms to make abortions harder (or impossible) to obtain, and it doesn't stop the GOP from entirely defunding Planned Parenthood (leaving millions of women in this country without adequate healthcare)--but neither the GOP nor Trump can reverse Roe v Wade.
I'm still just trying to find whatever silver linings I can grasp onto.
|
Roe v wade isn't even the governing case anymore. The lastest case bases around what is reasonable access and recently struck down some of Texas' admitting privilege and other requirements that was forcing clinics to close. They held that when consider the pool of women affected by a change you had to consider all women that could be in the position not just the single women tryin to get an abortion.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...supreme-court/
There also a link in the article going to another article on how to define undo burden which is worth a read