Supreme Court Cases Thread

[Pete]

Anyone here ever changed schools and been picked on by a large group, and not have he advantage of having your crew of life long friends around you to help absorb and shrug off being picked on?

Feels pretty god damn lonely and helpless, and more than a little hopeless.

[Pete]

Parents and religious leaders say do “X,” and you get mocked for not doing “Y” (which is support by adults in authority).  Would feel pretty horrible to be alone a “freak.”

Kids kill themselves all the time.

[michigancat]

I think the point is that the massive middle part doesn’t go into what is and isn’t legal. Which is going to range from essentially everything to essentially nothing depending on the state.

I was just responding to CNS suggesting that 60+% wanted unrestricted access, which is pretty far off.

Anyway, my whole point is that gay marriage has considerably broader geographic support than Roe.  A majority of republicans now support gay marriage. I think any gay marriage prohibition would have a very hard time getting through anywhere.

When obergefell is overturned gay marriage will immediately be illegal in most (if not all) red states based on the laws on the books.  None of those states will pass a law legalizing gay marriage.

I think state legislatures (where currently prohibited (or vague) absent Obergefell) ought to be getting their butts in gear to get the issue on ballots ASAP.  FWIW, two (MI, GA) of the seven (LA, GA, TN, KY, OH, MI, ND) states where it's undisputedly prohibited absent Obergefell (and without any challenges pending in intermediate courts) went blue in 2020.   

Again, even in red states, it's supported by the majority.  The legislation would pass today everywhere if it got on the ballots and a fair cross section voted.

I disagree they would pass.

Same, I think our bud DQ is being a bit naive.

I don't know how you could look at the current GOP discourse surrounding the "don't say gay" bill, "grooming", trans rights, etc. and think "oh these people clearly support gay marriage and would actually pass a state law ensuring it's legality".

[Dugout DickStone]

yeah, the need to take an additional step to ensure that right after the SC decides it is up to the states is why that right is in trouble.

[sonofdaxjones]

Abortion:  Safe, legal, rare-A Dem Pres in the 90’s.  Our current #shitshow referred to the process as being used only as a last resort during one of his 35 runs for President.

Now: Any time, any place, under any circumstances.

What changed?

[Dr Rick Daris]

He’s also an adult. Suck it up and deal. That’s also how I feel about the high school stuff. Like, I think it’s weird that the coaches/teachers think it’s ok (it isn’t) but I also don’t care that much. Life is full of people unaware of how in appropriate and ignorant they are.

If your kid was getting singled out and bullied as a result you might care more.

What would my kid be singled out and bullied for? Also it’s wrong and shouldn’t be allowed but I’d spend more of my energy laughing at the person doing it than anything else.

Not being the preferred flavor of Christian or a non-Christian?  Happened at my high school. I can vividly recall the mocking a Jehovah’s Witness kid got….kid was just following parents/church commands, and refused to participate.

Saw an evangelical kid tell a Jewish kid he was “going to hell.” Only came up because an adult forced a religious activity (“church”) in a government funded (“state”) school.

That kind of crap happens all the time.

Yeah, kids can be mean I guess. Religion, clothes, shoes, weight issues, the kind of car you drive, etc. i was very fortunate in high school and never had to worry about being bullied or anything. I guess I’d just let my kid know how big of clowns those people are though and that simply ignoring something or laughing at it is usually a good plan. If it’s not one thing it’s another and making big deals out of things you’ll more than likely never going to be able to fix/get rid of is hardly ever the best policy. But that’s just me.

[BIG APPLE CAT]

I think there are a lot of moderate pubs who are taking the mentality of "surely they wouldn't keep going? Lol. Unless..." And then when it happens they'll shrug their shoulders and be like "huh, didn't see that coming" and since it doesn't affect them directly they won't really care. Like they aren't going to be outspoken in their support of taking away people's rights but it certainly won't bother them when it happens

[DQ12]

1. Those numbers will quickly change once churches and other powerful political groups start campaigning. 

2. These numbers don't take into account conservatives correctly imo.  Just like when they tried to measure how many trump voters there were.

Like I said, we're both speculating.  But broadly speaking, the issue has bipartisan support across the electorate.  I don't have up to date numbers on state by state pub support, but I think people (you, Chi, Lib) are underestimating the shift since pre-Obergefell.  And I don't know what's on the Court's docket or when it'll have a chance to reverse Obergefell, but time looks like it's on the pro-gay marriage side. 

All that to say, those trying to definitively say "and gay marriage is next!" may end up being right, but I think that fear is quite a bit more remote relative to abortion.  The Court would need to reverse Obergefell, and states where it is prohibited/vague would need to withstand an electorate (and in many cases, a state court) that disagrees with the prohibition.

[ChiComCat]

Abortion:  Safe, legal, rare-A Dem Pres in the 90’s.  Our current #shitshow referred to the process as being used only as a last resort during one of his 35 runs for President.

Now: Any time, any place, under any circumstances.

What changed?

I would like abortion to be safe, legal, and rare.  I would also allow it under nearly any circumstance.  I think there's a difference between personal views and what you would legislatively enforce on others.

[DQ12]

I think the point is that the massive middle part doesn’t go into what is and isn’t legal. Which is going to range from essentially everything to essentially nothing depending on the state.

I was just responding to CNS suggesting that 60+% wanted unrestricted access, which is pretty far off.

Anyway, my whole point is that gay marriage has considerably broader geographic support than Roe.  A majority of republicans now support gay marriage. I think any gay marriage prohibition would have a very hard time getting through anywhere.

When obergefell is overturned gay marriage will immediately be illegal in most (if not all) red states based on the laws on the books.  None of those states will pass a law legalizing gay marriage.

I think state legislatures (where currently prohibited (or vague) absent Obergefell) ought to be getting their butts in gear to get the issue on ballots ASAP.  FWIW, two (MI, GA) of the seven (LA, GA, TN, KY, OH, MI, ND) states where it's undisputedly prohibited absent Obergefell (and without any challenges pending in intermediate courts) went blue in 2020.   

Again, even in red states, it's supported by the majority.  The legislation would pass today everywhere if it got on the ballots and a fair cross section voted.

I disagree they would pass.

Same, I think our bud DQ is being a bit naive.

I don't know how you could look at the current GOP discourse surrounding the "don't say gay" bill, "grooming", trans rights, etc. and think "oh these people clearly support gay marriage and would actually pass a state law ensuring it's legality".

I'm just looking at the numbers on this issue. 

[SkinnyBenny]

I think the point is that the massive middle part doesn’t go into what is and isn’t legal. Which is going to range from essentially everything to essentially nothing depending on the state.

I was just responding to CNS suggesting that 60+% wanted unrestricted access, which is pretty far off.

Anyway, my whole point is that gay marriage has considerably broader geographic support than Roe.  A majority of republicans now support gay marriage. I think any gay marriage prohibition would have a very hard time getting through anywhere.

Right now, in 2022, you are with this where Spracne was in 2020 or so with the court and Roe.

Bro, I think you living in Illinois (if that is indeed where you still live) is coloring your outlook quite a bit. If the Supreme Court overturns this, there are states that will absolutely make gay marriage illegal, either through their gerrymandered legislatures or through a very gullible and easy-to-influence electorate hellbent on punishing people who don't fit in their evangelical religious box. Are you being serious right now? "I'm just going by the numbers" completely discounts the last six years of radicalization that Republicans have been dogwalking their base through. It will continue, and it will continue to get worse.

[DQ12]

I think the point is that the massive middle part doesn’t go into what is and isn’t legal. Which is going to range from essentially everything to essentially nothing depending on the state.

I was just responding to CNS suggesting that 60+% wanted unrestricted access, which is pretty far off.

Anyway, my whole point is that gay marriage has considerably broader geographic support than Roe.  A majority of republicans now support gay marriage. I think any gay marriage prohibition would have a very hard time getting through anywhere.

Right now, in 2022, you are with this where Spracne was in 2020 or so with the court and Roe.

Bro, I think you living in Illinois (if that is indeed where you still live) is coloring your outlook quite a bit. If the Supreme Court overturns this, there are states that will absolutely make gay marriage illegal. Are you being serious right now?

I live in KC.  I think you guys are still living in 2014.  I think looking at some recent polling (especially with respect to where things were 10, 20, 30 years ago) would make you guys feel better (even if it doesn't convince you of my POV).

Which is my entire point -- there is far broader support of gay marriage (geographically and ideologically) than there ever has been for abortion access to Roe's limits.

[SkinnyBenny]

K. Well living in a big city may be coloring that view, then. (Also see the edit I made after you responded.)

[Rage Against the McKee]

Kansas would have to pass a constitutional amendment to legalize gay marriage. I don't think it's possible to get half of our legislature to vote for that. 2/3 is completely impossible.

[DQ12]

K. Well living in a big city may be coloring that view, then. (Also see the edit I made after you responded.)

Your edit about the post trump republican party ignores that support for gay marriage among republicans has pretty steadily risen over the last decade (just like it has in basically every other demographic) and now includes a majority of pubs.

Maybe the polling over the last 10-15 years is just wrong? Or maybe people won't vote?  Like I said, it needs to get on the ballot and people need to actually show up and vote, but that's pretty much true for any non-judicial measure.

[Rage Against the McKee]

K. Well living in a big city may be coloring that view, then. (Also see the edit I made after you responded.)

Your edit about the post trump republican party ignores that support for gay marriage among republicans has pretty steadily risen over the last decade (just like it has in basically every other demographic) and now includes a majority of pubs.

Maybe the polling over the last 10-15 years is just wrong?

I don't think the polling is wrong, but the republicans who don't support gay marriage won't vote for a candidate who does. It makes it impossible for the republicans to win a general election if they run someone who isn't a bigoted bad person. And the republicans who do support gay marriage don't really care about the issue enough to let it influence their vote in a general election. Also, when candidates openly start running against gay marriage, most of their voters will also adopt that belief, similarly to how most Christians switched from being pro-choice to pro-life during Reagan's presidency.

[Dr Rick Daris]

Kansas would have to pass a constitutional amendment to legalize gay marriage. I don't think it's possible to get half of our legislature to vote for that. 2/3 is completely impossible.

It’s stuff like this that is a huge problem. I’m not sure a majority of Kansans would vote to take the right away but I also don’t think that a majority would vote to allow it. Never underestimate Christian hate.

[BIG APPLE CAT]

DQ I'm curious, please indulge me on this hypothetical. If you are voting and the R candidate states that they will not stand in the way of an overturning of Obergefell et. al would you switch tickets or be like well, alright then, that's fine and vote R anyway?

And this isn't a classic BAC-ambush-to-get-you-to-admit-you-hate-gays question it’s more like a litmus test to see how ambivalent you are on the issue.

FTR I will admit that I am a straight white cis male, and I (and my family) do not currently require abortion services (for any reason, like the 1% medical or 99% recreational) nor do I anticipate we will anytime soon. None of these cases affect me or my day to day life directly but the idea that millions of people could be (and are being) stripped of their rights because a small percentage of people disapprove is unconscionable.

I’m not saying shame on you for not caping up fighting for stuff for which you have no skin in the game, I guess this is just a really long winded way of saying I think you are drastically underestimating what the gop intends to do and I don’t believe you have much incentive to scrutinize or worry about it

[ChiComCat]

McKee beat me to some of this but I think there is a massive difference between a Republican supporting gay marriage and it having any impact on their voting.  It's far more likely to me that gay marriage is a voting issue in the Republican primary and really only to the evangelicals who are against it.  As districts have become more gerrymandered, there's a lot less incentive to do anything remotely moderate.

[Kat Kid]

1. Those numbers will quickly change once churches and other powerful political groups start campaigning. 

2. These numbers don't take into account conservatives correctly imo.  Just like when they tried to measure how many trump voters there were.

Like I said, we're both speculating.  But broadly speaking, the issue has bipartisan support across the electorate.  I don't have up to date numbers on state by state pub support, but I think people (you, Chi, Lib) are underestimating the shift since pre-Obergefell.  And I don't know what's on the Court's docket or when it'll have a chance to reverse Obergefell, but time looks like it's on the pro-gay marriage side. 

All that to say, those trying to definitively say "and gay marriage is next!" may end up being right, but I think that fear is quite a bit more remote relative to abortion.  The Court would need to reverse Obergefell, and states where it is prohibited/vague would need to withstand an electorate (and in many cases, a state court) that disagrees with the prohibition.

I think you should really take a look at these two maps and re-evaluate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_law_in_the_United_States_by_state

[DQ12]

DQ I'm curious, please indulge me on this hypothetical. If you are voting and the R candidate states that they will not stand in the way of an overturning of Obergefell et. al would you switch tickets or be like well, alright then, that's fine and vote R anyway?

And this isn't a classic BAC-ambush-to-get-you-to-admit-you-hate-gays question it’s more like a litmus test to see how ambivalent you are on the issue.

FTR I will admit that I am a straight white cis male, and I (and my family) do not currently require abortion services (for any reason, like the 1% medical or 99% recreational) nor do I anticipate we will anytime soon. None of these cases affect me or my day to day life directly but the idea that millions of people could be (and are being) stripped of their rights because a small percentage of people disapprove is unconscionable.

I’m not saying shame on you for not caping up fighting for stuff for which you have no skin in the game, I guess this is just a really long winded way of saying I think you are drastically underestimating what the gop intends to do and I don’t believe you have much incentive to scrutinize or worry about it

Just so I'm clear on the hypothetical, how would a state politician stand in the way of a SCOTUS decision.  Not trying to be pedantic, just want to make sure i'm understanding the hypothetical.

[DQ12]

1. Those numbers will quickly change once churches and other powerful political groups start campaigning. 

2. These numbers don't take into account conservatives correctly imo.  Just like when they tried to measure how many trump voters there were.

Like I said, we're both speculating.  But broadly speaking, the issue has bipartisan support across the electorate.  I don't have up to date numbers on state by state pub support, but I think people (you, Chi, Lib) are underestimating the shift since pre-Obergefell.  And I don't know what's on the Court's docket or when it'll have a chance to reverse Obergefell, but time looks like it's on the pro-gay marriage side. 

All that to say, those trying to definitively say "and gay marriage is next!" may end up being right, but I think that fear is quite a bit more remote relative to abortion.  The Court would need to reverse Obergefell, and states where it is prohibited/vague would need to withstand an electorate (and in many cases, a state court) that disagrees with the prohibition.

I think you should really take a look at these two maps and re-evaluate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_law_in_the_United_States_by_state

The colors on those maps largely (entirely?) reflect the electorate pre-2015/obergefell.  If you can't recognize that support has fundamentally changed over the last 10ish years, then we're just disagreeing, which is fine.

[DQ12]

Also, as a FWIW, nobody joined Thomas's concurrence.  I don't think anyone besides Thomas is chomping at the bit to revisit those decisions.

If Obergefell and the others are in danger of reversal (and who knows, they may be), it's quite a ways off.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Weren't the Obergefell and Roe decisions based on a right to privacy? I don't understand how you can overrule one and keep the other, if so.

[Spracne]

Is 85% a lot?

Yeah.  Like I said, I haven’t seen a state law that prohibits abortion in every circumstance.  I feel like my own views are fairly fringe, and that’s not what I want to see.

I must confess, it is difficult for me to square the sweet Dlew I've met in real life with the Goblin-mind Dlew in this thread. Still catching up on the thread, though.