US Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs Wade

I was under the impression that breaking the windows and robbing the furniture was legitimate political discourse.

There is also a yearly march to the the supreme Court to get them to overturn Roe vs Wade which would seem to break the same law.

Why would it be hard to argue? They are perfectly happy and have allowed protests next to planned parenthood to hassle anyone walking in which is a supreme court judgement. They have provided the above exception to this law. This protest seems to have been started by the neighbours themselves. Protesting outside of politician's homes is pretty well established at this stage.

The entire point of said law is stop people from coercing a judgement they want from a judges place of work/home and have provided an exception for a case which pretty explicitly wants to coerce the judgement they want already. Given it doesn't protect anyone else's home so it isn't a right to privacy for Kavanagh or anything I fail to see why the home should provide any extra protection to the office in the specific case of this law.

I dislike protesting outside homes in general but there is no specific law to stop that happening outside of judges.

Didn't the court previously hold that protesting outside of the homes of abortion clinic employees is protected by the first amendment? Shoe's on the other foot now and they're crying about it. Fück him, he can always move like Christine Blasey has had to do.

The elected Democratic representatives in the Congress all want to talk about this leaked decision. They're campaigning on it. They're passing laws about it. Now, the Republicans in the US Senate, especially, don't want to talk about this because of the reasons you give: fear of backlash.

Well, not to be a picky fcuker, but it’s only some Democrats who want to talk about this leaked decision. Republicans are talking about it too, but naturally - not from the same perspective as Democrats who want to talk about it.

Overheal made the same point as you’re making about Republicans being afraid of a backlash, but I just don’t see any evidence to support that argument when Republicans already had trigger laws in place, ready to go, were they ever successful in having Roe v Wade overturned. In the meantime they’ll continue to try and legislate for more restrictive laws regarding abortion in their respective States.

On that basis, fears of a backlash? What backlash?

I don’t think we’re off topic, sure the whole reason for the introduction of the 8th amendment in the first place was because some people didn’t want a repeat of the Roe v Wade decision in Ireland. The wording of the amendment was criticised at the time because it was argued that it would permit abortion in Ireland - the opposite of it’s intended effect.

The referendum on the right to travel came about as a result of the X case, and then there was the A, B and C case v Ireland which would be similar to the the Roe v Wade case on the basis that the Court rejected a right to abortion, but had violated the womens right to privacy -

A, B and C v Ireland is a landmark 2010 case of the European Court of Human Rights on the right to privacy under Article 8. The court rejected the argument that article 8 conferred a right to abortion, but found that Ireland had violated the European Convention on Human Rights by failing to provide an accessible and effective procedure by which a woman can have established whether she qualifies for a legal abortion under current Irish law.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A,_B_and_C_v_Ireland

Which led to the ham-fisted effort we have in legislation today under which the woman who captured the attention of the public would still not have qualified for a termination of her pregnancy as she was 17 weeks pregnant at the time and there was no requirement to terminate her pregnancy on the basis of the legislation as it is currently written.

Having gotten rid of the 8th amendment didn’t and still hasn’t changed anything in practical terms. It simply means more cases are likely to come before the Courts than before is all.