Roe v. Wade simply covered the right to an abortion in all 50 states. If it were repealed, it would become an idiot states' rights issue again. It doesn't mean that trans-related healthcare would become illegal. It would again be a state by state quagmire.
No Roe v Wade wasnt actually about abortion technically speaking. It was about the right to medical privacy, which enables that any thing that's considered safe to do medically related is legal.
The removal of medical privacy enables the government to legislate what happens between a patient and a doctor whereas before that was considered private.
That’s not how this works. Roe v Wade isn’t a law that’s either valid or not, and if its "overturned" that doesn’t mean nobody could cite it. The right to medical privacy would still be there unless the supremes wrote a decision literally saying that the concept of medical privacy was incorrectly inferred from the constitution. And if they’re willing to do that, and states are willing to ban HRT, then it doesn’t matter if they ban abortion or HRT first.
A court decision only has power as precedent in other court cases. And all that means is if a court ignores it you might be able to convince a higher court that they shouldn’t have and that they should grant an appeal. It prevents the government from making laws only to the extent that a legislator doesn’t want to start a court case.
Really the argument is that a court system willing to ban abortion would also be willing to restrict other rights. But abortion doesn’t really function as much of a foot in the door here, it’s just the thing they’re loudest about. If they win they’d have time to do other things, I guess.
If that legal mechanism becomes no longer valid with regard to abortion then its validity with numerous other procedures and acts can be brought into question, no?
Exactly. So blue states allow abortion and red states ban it, which does not create enough pressure in the system to start a meltdown and eventual balkanization like I think a national ban would. And because republicans are ruthlessly smart, they'll never actually push to ban it nationally.
No. If they make an argument based on the life and rights of the fetus and win, then its no longer a state by state issue. Any abortion anywhere would be a violation of that fetus's right to life, so with a stacked court, conservatives could just full send it and ban abortions in all 50 states regardless of circumstances. This is the reason why red states have been passing bans on abortion even in cases of rape or incest (which most Republicans think is too harsh), because you can't make the right to life argument they while also making exceptions. They're trying to agitate the courts and see if they can get a Supreme Court ruling in their favor.
Roe v. Wade simply covered the right to an abortion in all 50 states. If it were repealed, it would become an idiot states' rights issue again. It doesn't mean that trans-related healthcare would become illegal. It would again be a state by state quagmire.
No Roe v Wade wasnt actually about abortion technically speaking. It was about the right to medical privacy, which enables that any thing that's considered safe to do medically related is legal.
The removal of medical privacy enables the government to legislate what happens between a patient and a doctor whereas before that was considered private.
That’s not how this works. Roe v Wade isn’t a law that’s either valid or not, and if its "overturned" that doesn’t mean nobody could cite it. The right to medical privacy would still be there unless the supremes wrote a decision literally saying that the concept of medical privacy was incorrectly inferred from the constitution. And if they’re willing to do that, and states are willing to ban HRT, then it doesn’t matter if they ban abortion or HRT first.
A court decision only has power as precedent in other court cases. And all that means is if a court ignores it you might be able to convince a higher court that they shouldn’t have and that they should grant an appeal. It prevents the government from making laws only to the extent that a legislator doesn’t want to start a court case.
Really the argument is that a court system willing to ban abortion would also be willing to restrict other rights. But abortion doesn’t really function as much of a foot in the door here, it’s just the thing they’re loudest about. If they win they’d have time to do other things, I guess.
Who told you that? It's literally about abortion. They just used "right to privacy" as the legal mechanism for it. It was explicitly about abortion.
If that legal mechanism becomes no longer valid with regard to abortion then its validity with numerous other procedures and acts can be brought into question, no?
Exactly. So blue states allow abortion and red states ban it, which does not create enough pressure in the system to start a meltdown and eventual balkanization like I think a national ban would. And because republicans are ruthlessly smart, they'll never actually push to ban it nationally.
No. If they make an argument based on the life and rights of the fetus and win, then its no longer a state by state issue. Any abortion anywhere would be a violation of that fetus's right to life, so with a stacked court, conservatives could just full send it and ban abortions in all 50 states regardless of circumstances. This is the reason why red states have been passing bans on abortion even in cases of rape or incest (which most Republicans think is too harsh), because you can't make the right to life argument they while also making exceptions. They're trying to agitate the courts and see if they can get a Supreme Court ruling in their favor.