Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
She wrote that she believed the 7-2 Roe v Wade ruling that established those federal abortion rights had “usurped the will of the American people”
Fuck you Amy. If you don't want an abortion, don't have one. But stay the fuck out of other people's personal decisions.
I feel like making the President above the law was usurping the will of the people but you fucking did it anyway
‘People’ as established by Citizens United.
Even more strangely, she seems to think that stomping on rights is okay, even if most of the country was against that? The will of the people doesn't matter now, but it did back then?
Abortion should be legal, but tying it to an amendment to make it seem like it's protected by the constitution was always a lie that shouldn't have gotten through.
It's a bit late in the game for that isn't it?
I mean - she's right, but the SC has already cast aside law, precedent and the Constitution at this point, and is ruling almost entirely based on opinion. Or maybe it would be more accurate to say, "preference."
In the book, set for publication on 9 September, Barrett asserted her belief that the June 2022 ruling that struck down abortion rights nationally “respected the choice” of Americans.
Ah... so she's not just contradicting the plain reality of the current SC, but her own statements.
Or more precisely, just spewing whatever line of bullshit might serve her current purposes.
Which is undoubtedly the reason she was nominated in the first place, and the exact thing she was expected to contribute.
Helluva timeline we're living in here....
And she's not even in the top 4 worst justices
This; painfully, this.
>“I want Americans to understand the law – and that it’s not just an opinion poll about whether the supreme court thinks something is good or … bad,” Barrett said. “What the court is trying to do is see what the American people have decided.”
Weird. I thought the court’s job was to determine the constitutionality of laws as accurately as possible.
Fuck these spineless twats. Their rulings are worthy of adorning toilet paper.
Calling them spineless suggests that they aren't part of the attack on democracy.
Complicit is the word theyre searching for. Accomplices would also suffice. Co-conspirator might be giving them a bit more agency than they deserve, though.
Ask that bitch her opinion on women having fewer rights than men in this country, then tell her to sit down and shut up like good breeding stock
Oh, the fucking irony.
Gotta salvage her cred as a hateful conservative hypocrite.
But it is an opinion poll, just one with a small sample size. Having a law degree may be a factor but it’s still opinion-based.
Yeah because they always write up how the decision came about. The logic and reasoning based on law and precedence. I mean if they did not then it would just be invalid and void.
