Monday, June 26, 2023

Are the Alito Five Capable of Regret?


Linda Greenhouse, long-time Supreme Court reporter and an expert on its history, titled an opinion piece, "Is There Any Twinge of Regret Among the Anti-Abortion Justices?" After a lengthy discussion of all the personalities among the Alito Five and the wealth of history and legal precedents and arguments contained in an avalanche of friend-of-the-court briefs filed in the matter of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Org., Greenhouse concludes her essay bluntly:

So no, I don’t think the Dobbs justices are sorry. They did what they were put there to do, what they wanted to do, and they were quite explicit in washing their hands of the consequences.

The consequences? You may be oblivious to the mounting numbers of women in extremis, with potential fatalities resulting from gone-wrong pregnancies, untreated because doctors in anti-abortion states are now terrified of new rules:

A report titled “Care Post-Roe: Documenting cases of poor-quality care since the Dobbs decision,” published in mid-May by teams of experts from the University of California at San Francisco and the University of Texas at Austin, ... consists largely of excerpts from submissions by 50 health care providers, many of whom felt, as one wrote, that “our hands are tied” as they waited anxiously for their patients’ conditions to deteriorate to the point where the pregnancy could be terminated within the narrow exceptions permitted by the state laws. When doctors turned women away, their next encounter was sometimes in the emergency room or intensive care unit as the patient lay bleeding or even near death.

Unable to get an abortion in their own home states, many women are fleeing to neighboring states, and paying the fare (which ain't light). Chaos has added to the misery fourfold, which moved Greenhouse to consider whether Alito, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Thomas, or Coney Barrett felt even a glimmer of regret for overturning what had been for 50 years a basic right of women.


On the way to that not surprising conclusion, Greenhouse gets into Court history about when regret over a decision leads to a reversal. She recounts the interesting reversal in 1942 of a previous decision in 1940 that allowed school systems to enforce rules for demonstrating patriotism, expelling students who didn't salute the flag or say the Pledge of Allegiance. In 1942, the West Virginia Board of Education required public schools to include salutes to the flag by teachers and students as a mandatory part of school activities. The children in a family of Jehovah's Witnesses refused to perform the salute and were sent home from school for non-compliance. The case, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, ended up with the Supremes, who had previously, just three years before, ruled that school systems could penalize children for not saluting the flag, actually expel students. But in 1942, the Court reversed itself.

Three men on the Court had voted in 1940 to allow for the expulsion of non-saluting children, and the same three voted to change their minds in 1942, admitting openly that they had been wrong. They regretted the chaos and misery for Jehovah Witness families and tried to correct it. 

But these guys in 2023? Greenhouse concludes that regret isn't a part of their makeup. They're too busy enjoying their status as billionaire accessories, riding the boat but not steering it.


Wolf's Head said...

It's just easier and cheaper not to get pregnant in the first place.

Raise your children to be promiscuous and stupid and they'll pay the consequences.

Typical leftist behavior to refuse accountability for their actions.

Red Hornet said...

Get an industrial cattle prod for when you catch 'em masturbating.
Incel boyz is easier to bully. Enroll girls in fundamentalist lockdown daycare to train for subservience and unquestioning obedience. But then watch out for half-porcine grandkids stealing your pot stash and truck. Assed yer dokter 'bout MMR or be prepared for a warty family. It's the Hound Dog way, like Dave Ramsey on Molly (Ecstasy/MDMA).

Anonymous said...

Sex should not be for pleasure, but for procreation only?

Raising children to be promiscuous AND stupid is what sex education counters. Parents obviously fail at this task or they wouldn't raise promiscuous AND stupid children.

"Refuse accountability for their actions" is more MAGA gaslighting.

Wolf's Head said...

Anon, wrong again!

There are contraceptives in case you haven't heard. And besides, if you agree to having sex you have a moral responsibility to take into account the possible outcome, whether pregnancy or venereal disease.

"Raising children to be promiscuous AND stupid is what sex education counters."

That should be the parents' responsibility, rather than taught by strangers who are now including deviant sexual behaviors as 'acceptable'.

" Parents obviously fail at this task or they wouldn't raise promiscuous AND stupid children."

I agree, but not all parents are like that.

As for 'gaslighting', agreeing to sex then refusing to care for the resultant child by killing it is far beyond gaslighting.

Anonymous said...

The last people I want to talk to about my sex life is my parents. You can be my guest if you and your parents are so close.

Most people, for better or worse, are self-taught about sex.