SCOTUS: No longer content with stacking, they're now dealing from the bottom of the deck

[The Evil Genius]

 

[The Evil Genius]

There is a f bomb at the end..but it's been true for how long? 

 

 

[max21]

Anyone read what Youngkin said? What a ****ing loser 

[TheGreatBuzz]

3 hours ago, The Almighty Buzz said:

 

I had one a few months ago.  In fact, have my first sperm test Monday.  You can PM me if you have questions or anything. 

 

*So how does the sperm test work?  Does Buzzette just spit in a cup or what?

 

2 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Be bold and tag her, bro 

 

@thegreaterbuzzette

[Captain Wiggles]

[Llevron]

@The Almighty Buzzwe will miss you bro 🥺

[Skintime]

2 hours ago, JCB said:

My wife wants to leave the country, yesterday. As an academic, I'm not sure what job prospects I would have and I'm not sure we're financially ready. But I can't believe I'm having to consider these things in my early 50s.

 

All I know is that the only hope we have - this year, 2024 - is to motivate as many people as we can to vote, vote, vote. Blue wave NOW or the whole thing is over.

I've been thinking along those terms as well. If the Progressives continue to struggle with messaging and an inability to counter anything the traitors are doing, then this will be the last year with real elections. We will become Russia and the BS elections they have. I have family in Denmark and it may be time to join them. The people here are no longer represented by anybody in the government..

2 hours ago, Llevron said:

Separation of church and state is really something Dems should be saying wayyyyyyy more often to the point of absurdity imo 

There is much they should be saying and they are not. To busy fighting for nothing that makes sense.

[Simmsy]

They're going low, so we should go high? Seems too moderate to me...

[China]

Abortion pills become central issue after SCOTUS ruling

 

The Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade immediately pivots the fight over abortion access to state efforts to restrict medication abortions or so-called "abortion pills."

 

The big picture: The pills used to terminate a pregnancy — mifepristone and misoprostol — are FDA-approved for use in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy and are frequently prescribed online and mailed to patients.

 

State efforts to restrict their use will pose thorny questions about how to enforce bans and challenge the notion of patients' rights, experts say.

"During the last 50 years or more in the abortion culture wars, there has been a line drawn that punishments should be meted out against providers and not against women themselves," Lawrence Gostin, a law professor at Georgetown University told Axios. "I think we're about to cross that line."

State of play: Medication abortion accounted for 54% of all U.S. abortions in 2020, up from 39% in 2017, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

 

The FDA in December lifted long-standing restrictions, making the pills more widely available, via telemedicine appointments and online prescribing that enables delivery to someone's door.

Between the lines: Republican states looking to limit access to the pills could encounter practical challenges and legal problems doing so.

 

 

[thegreaterbuzzette]

36 minutes ago, The Almighty Buzz said:

 

 

@thegreaterbuzzette

You’ll have to show me how this spitting thing works. 

[China]

Baker signs order protecting abortion providers; Mass lawmakers decry Roe decision

 

Massachusetts lawmakers decried the Supreme Court's decision to end the constitutional right to abortion in the United States. Most expressed anger⁠—and a pledge to fight back.

And Gov. Charlie Baker, a Republican, signed an executive order designed to protect providers in Massachusetts who help out-of-state patients.

 

WBUR is a nonprofit news organization. Our coverage relies on your financial support. If you value articles like the one you're reading right now, give today.

 

It prohibits any executive department agencies from assisting another state's investigation. It also protects Massachusetts providers who deliver reproductive health care services from losing their professional licenses as the result of an out-of-state charge.

 

"The commonwealth has long been a leader in protecting a woman’s right to choose and access to reproductive health services, while other states have criminalized or otherwise restricted access,” Baker said in a statement. “This executive order will further preserve that right and protect reproductive health care providers who serve out of state residents."

 

Abortion in Massachusetts and the rest of New England remains legal. In Massachusetts, abortion is legal through 24 weeks of pregnancy, under state law.

 

Many members of the state's all-Democratic congressional delegation immediately released statements decrying the decision. Rep. Katherine Clark, the House's fourth-highest ranking Democrat, called the Supreme Court decision "dystopian."

 

Click on the link for the full article

[mistertim]

2 hours ago, Llevron said:

Separation of church and state is really something Dems should be saying wayyyyyyy more often to the point of absurdity imo 

 

But how in the world would they then find enough time for nervous hand wringing and waffling? 

[Llevron]

He lived….!!

 

And what a life it is 

Edited June 24, 2022 by Llevron

[Bang]

So Justices hold their seat until they die, then the sitting president gets to appoint a new one to take their place.

 

 

Just a thought.

 

~Bang

[skinsmarydu]

Expand the SCOTUS right now.   Appoint progressive judges.   Overturn this **** on appeal.  (We can do that, right?) 

Paging @PleaseBlitz or @DogofWar1...

 

Edit, add:  I'm so upset I hit "send" too soon.  I just got back from my massage, and my therapist is my best progressive friend over the last 30 years.  It took everything I could muster to relax, and everything she could muster to keep from crushing me...my shoulder and knee are feeling better, but both of our hearts are screaming for all the women who haven't been through menopause and are subject to this stupid decision. 

Edited June 24, 2022 by skinsmarydu

[China]

 

[China]

 

[skinsmarydu]

 

 

And I hope he understands that there is also a "herself". 

[Forehead]

2 hours ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

You’ll have to show me how this spitting thing works. 

 

Buzz, you have what's known as "a keeper."

[TheGreatBuzz]

5 minutes ago, Forehead said:

 

Buzz, you have what's known as "a keeper."

 

Anyone think I can get one of the mods to change her name here to "Ofbuzz"?

[PeterMP]

1 hour ago, skinsmarydu said:

Expand the SCOTUS right now.   Appoint progressive judges.   Overturn this **** on appeal.  (We can do that, right?) 

Paging @PleaseBlitz or @DogofWar1...

 

Edit, add:  I'm so upset I hit "send" too soon.  I just got back from my massage, and my therapist is my best progressive friend over the last 30 years.  It took everything I could muster to relax, and everything she could muster to keep from crushing me...my shoulder and knee are feeling better, but both of our hearts are screaming for all the women who haven't been through menopause and are subject to this stupid decision. 

 

Yes, it is possible in theory, but it isn't likely practical.  Right off the bat, it wouldn't get by the filibuster so you'd have to have people to agree to eliminate the filibuster.

 

Then all that would happen is the next time the Republicans had control is they'd expand the court even more to get enough judges to get decisions that they want.

 

You'd create a situation where the Constitution would change based on which party was in power.  Which I don't think anybody thinks is a good idea.

 

 

[Larry]

5 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

You'd create a situation where the Constitution would change based on which party was in power.  Which I don't think anybody thinks is a good idea.

 

Uh, the folks who just spent the last 30 years changing it, might not agree.  As long as it's being changed by their team.  

[PokerPacker]

2 hours ago, Bang said:

So Justices hold their seat until they die, then the sitting president gets to appoint a new one to take their place.

 

 

Just a thought.

 

~Bang

These are facts.

[China]

1 hour ago, PeterMP said:

 

Yes, it is possible in theory, but it isn't likely practical.  Right off the bat, it wouldn't get by the filibuster so you'd have to have people to agree to eliminate the filibuster.

 

Then all that would happen is the next time the Republicans had control is they'd expand the court even more to get enough judges to get decisions that they want.

 

You'd create a situation where the Constitution would change based on which party was in power.  Which I don't think anybody thinks is a good idea.

 

 

 

Well, you'd be wrong.  I'd take having justices on my side when my party's in power over never having them on my side.  Not perfect but better than what we have now.  And right now the Supreme Court is at an all time low of confidence at 25%.  The majority of this country thinks they suck, because they do.  So, even a temporary change is better than no change at all.

 

 

 

[spjunkies]