It’s a McConnell /Trump judge, are you at all surprised? They rammed through s many buffoons it’s really not surprising they also pushed through a bunch of unethical hacks.
Those 2 have done more to undermine the credibility of the judiciary than anything I can think of in the past 100 years.
It’s amazing how much damage you can do in 5 years. The 1 illegitimate holdup of SC Justice and 4 years of rubber stamping heritage foundation candidates.
Kacsmaryk had to be nominated by Trump 3 times to get approved. The first time, the committee sat on his nomination until it timed out. The 2nd time, the committee voted to move him forwards, then McConnell sat on his nomination until it timed out. It was literally almost 2 years between his initial nomination and confirmation. And in less than 4 years, he will have had 2 decisions struck down either in part or in full by the Supreme Court.
Judge denied an abortion because as he questioned her “overall intelligence, emotional development and stability”.
Voters ousted judge.
Now de santis wants said judge on the Florida supreme court.
Not mature enough for an abortion, but mature enough for a baby, dafuq?
SCOTUS stayed the MAGA judge’s ruling. (Alito and Thomas dissented.)
There are several stories like this, coming from a variety of states, but the basic gist is equally depressing in all of them.
Who says they aren’t the forced birth crowd?
If you don’t want to click the link, here is the chart that goes with the headline:
I wonder what the GOP will do with this. Are there ANY prominent pro-choice Republicans these days? Seems like there used to be a few but maybe they’re all Libertarians now.
It is instructive to go to the Gallup poll to see the results of some of the other questions:
“Specifically, close to half of Americans, 47%, now say abortion should be legal in all (34%) or most (13%) circumstances, while a similar proportion, 49%, want it legal in only a few (36%) or illegal in all (13%) circumstances.”
Combining the two, questions, it appears there are a significant number of people who say abortion should be legal in “only a few circumstances” who also say it should be legal in the first three months.
Well, if one of those circumstances is “it’s within the first trimester”…
83% want it legal in at least some circumstances but only 69% in the first trimester, so at least 14% think it should be illegal in the first trimester unless other factors apply. Presumably life of the mother, maybe also rape, incest, certain medical issues with the baby…
Since they didn’t go into which circumstances that 14% probably has some divergent viewpoints on exactly where to draw the line.
That’s not a particularly surprising result I guess.
I’d really like to see them add the question “What’s a trimester?”
First three months of each college school year.
Quick mulligan there is allowed.
But only for “my daughter” and not “your daughter”.
Back in 2018 they asked more specifically about first trimester:
This is with 60% saying it should be legal in the first 3 months.
> Now I am going to read some specific situations under which an abortion might be considered in the FIRST THREE MONTHS of pregnancy. Thinking specifically about the FIRST trimester, please say whether you think abortion should be legal in that situation, or illegal.
When the woman’s life is endangered -------------------------------83 Legal / 15 Illegal
When the child would be born mentally disabled ------------------56 Legal / 41 Illegal
When the child would be born with a life-threatening illness ----67 Legal / 31 Illegal
When the pregnancy was caused by rape or incest ---------------77 Legal / 21 Illegal
When the woman does not want the child for any reason -------45 Legal / 53 Illegal
When the child would be born with Down Syndrome -------------49 Legal /48 Illegal
So even with the recent uptick I’m guessing it’s still probably about 50/50 even in the first trimester if abortion should be available for anyone who wants it.
Those numbers add up to over 100%; so I would initially assume that they’re including those who say “legal all the time” (the 22%) in the other two categories.
Based on that, we get the 32% believe that it should be legal ONLY in the first trimester; 15% it should be legal in the first or second.
And that 31% believe that it should either be legal in only specific situations or not be legal at all? But this doesn’t seem to jive with what @Cooke posted above.
So I’m wondering what I’m missing. (Haven’t had time to read the full article.)
It’s three separate questions.
So for example a person who thought it should be legal in the first two trimesters but not the third would answer yes to questions 1 & 2 and no to question 3.
So yes, lots of people will say yes to more than one of those.
I don’t see the conflict.
13% think it should be illegal in all circumstances.
69% think it should be legal at least in the first trimester (maybe more).
Roughly 2% don’t know.
That leaves roughly 14% who think it should sometimes be legal but not across the board to any first trimester woman who wants it.
So that 14% might say it should be legal if the woman was raped or her life was in danger but not if the condom broke during sex with her boyfriend and she’d really prefer to wait a few more years before having kids.
As I mentioned earlier, I’m guessing that 14% has different views on exactly where the line should be, but something more restrictive than “available to any woman who wants one up to a certain gestational age”.
