-
Nobody Is As Ready For Pillowy Mounds Of Mashed Potatoes As Uncle Phil -
'Thanksgiving Grandma' Plans To Reunite With Mistaken Friend For The 9th Year Since 2016 -
Blessed By The Gift Of Prophecy, This Headline By 'The Onion' Has Been An Inspiration For Schadenfreude Memes -
People Are Joking About How Korean Mahwa 'The Ki Sisters' Is Like 'Baki For Women' -
The Slang Term 'Degen' Has Become A Staple Of Meme And Crypto Culture Over The Past Few Years
+5
Clinics were bombed to make this possible
Uploaded by BrentD15 Jun 26, 2022 at 08:54AM EDT
roe v. wade terrorism right wing extremism bombings shootings
Origin Entry: 2022 Supreme Court Overturning of Roe v. Wade
File type: png
Resolution: (1439px x 1816px)
File size: 320 KB
Moar:
+5
2022 Supreme Court Overturning of Roe v. Wade - Clinics were bombed to make this possible
| ◄ Previous | View Gallery Random Image | Next ► |
![Matt Ford @fordm In a solo concurring opinion, Thomas says the court should reconsider rulings that protect contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage. Cite as: 597 U. S. (2022) 3 THOMAS, J., concurring 381 U. S. 479 (1965) (right of married persons to obtain con- traceptives)*; Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U. S. 558 (2003) (right to engage in private, consensual sexual acts); and Oberge- fell v. Hodges, 576 U. S. 644 (2015) (right to same-sex mar- riage), are not at issue. The Court's abortion cases are unique, see ante, at 31-32, 66, 71-72, and no party has asked us to decide "whether our entire Fourteenth Amend- ment jurisprudence must be preserved or revised," McDon- ald, 561 U. S., at 813 (opinion of THOMAS, J.). Thus, I agree that "[n]othing in [the Court's] opinion should be under- stood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abor- tion." Ante, at 66. 19 For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, includ- ing Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any sub- stantive due process decision is "demonstrably erroneous," Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U. S. (2020) (THOMAS, J., concurring in judgment) (slip op., at 7), we have a duty to "correct the error" established in those precedents, Gamble v. United States, 587 U. S. (2019) (THOMAS, J., con- curring) (slip op., at 9). After overruling these demonstra- bly erroneous decisions, the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions guarantee the myr- iad rights that our substantive due process cases have gen- erated. For example, we could consider whether any of the rights announced in this Court's substantive due process cases are "privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Amdt. :](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/list/002/392/454/11f.png "Justice Clarence Thomas Suggests Overturning Gay Marriage")
Image Details
1,596 views (15 from today)
Uploaded Jun 26, 2022 at 08:54AM EDT
Origin Entry
About the Uploader
BrentD15
Treasurer & Elocutionist & Media Maid
