Protests at (fenced-in) SCOTUS today with a lot of slogans

Gen Z for Choice, at SCOTUS protest

Today I visited the Supreme Court area on 1 St NE across the street from the Capitol.  The fencing had driven the protesters into the street.

Most of the protesters when I was there were from a youth group.  There was one anti-abortion activist with a megaphone (“a woman doesn’t own her own body, God does”) getting shouted out.

Other sayings included “keep your rosaries off my ovaries”, “abortion is reputable health care”, and “fake babies in other people’s private places”.

The Washington Post has an op-ed by Robert Blake analyzing Justice Alito’s leaked “opinion” (which is embedded as a PDF).

I’ve written about “fundamental rights” in the past and will return to it.  Alito et al are certainly sticking to originalism and have come up with a rationale why Roe v Wade is so extraordinary that stare decisis will not hold. W

Evan Woflson has an important op-ed in the Washington Blade about the risk to gay issues (mainly marriage and possibly even sodomy laws;  the military DADT ban was settled in Congress, not the courts, thankfully).  Kevin Naff also has one.

I think the abortion issue is distinct in one way: a dependent human life is taken with abortion. The other issues don’t have this feature (although they had their own problematic possibilities in the past, as during the HIV horror of the 80s).  However, there are times when the life or health of the mother is in danger (and despite what some in the GOP claim, it isn’t always possible to avoid abortion to protect a mother’s life).  CNN presented an important case in Michigan today.  With multiple births sometimes one life has to be taken so the others can live.  (This may have happened in my own extended family back in the 1940s.)     And there are legitimate debates on when fertilization has happened or whether implantation counts, etc.   If a mother was the victim of rape, and forced to carry to term (in a sense her body is “conscripted” for a conflict just as a man’s is for war) she must be allowed to surrender the baby for adoption and not be forced to raise emH (Amy Barrett even pointed that out).

Here are the five videos I shot today:

1

SCOTUS protest

2

3

4

5

(Posted: Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 10 PM EDT)

Author: Jboushka

on home page

5 thoughts on “Protests at (fenced-in) SCOTUS today with a lot of slogans”

  1. Robert Salerno on a site called 76Crimes looks at whether Alito’s reasoning really could bring back sodomy laws. There could be the danger that a state that still has them could try to enforce it, forcing a challenge. But pre-Lawrence v Texas sodomy law prosecutions as such had been extremely rare https://76crimes.com/2022/05/04/could-republicans-and-the-supreme-court-reinstate-u-s-sodomy-laws/ However back in 1983 Texas threatened to pass a strengthening of its sodomy ;aw as the AIDS epidemic began (before the causative virus had even been identified). I was living in Dallas at the time.

  2. Hoeg Law does an hour long video on the leaked opinion https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLImiM5WdiQ&t=2896s At 44:16 Hoeg’s video discusses the question as to whether the weakness in the application of the 14th Amendment Due Process clause could be applied to other issues, especially LGBTQ, such as gay marriage and even the 2003 Lawrence v Texas opinion overturning homosexual sodomy laws. Hoeg concurs with the general fears, but in explicitly worded paragraph “3” presented at that point in the video, Alito says, no, this applies only to abortion because only abortion involves taking of life. At this point, we do not know “for sure” that the final opinion will order the overturning of Roe v. Wade, or whether if it does the opinion will strengthen this “reassurance” somewhat.

  3. Tierney Sneed of CNN has a story (4/23/2022) on how extremists in a few red states, such as Missouri, may go out of their way to regulate abortions performed outside their states but somehow connected to their residents or businesses, https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/23/politics/abortion-out-of-state-legislation/index.html . Today Tom Foreman noted that Missouri had considered a bill making it a felony to provide abortion information to a Mo resident, even applying to a hosting provider who allows such information to appear on its servers. This could exacerbate free speech problems down the road (as we have seen already ever since Charlottesville in 2017).

  4. Here is a reputable source’s (Webmd) discussion of the borderline between abortion and contraception in certain situations. https://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/features/birth-control-vs-abortion#:~:text=Birth%20control%20prevents%20an%20egg,reach%20and%20fertilize%20an%20egg.

    Theoretically, a state could pass a law claiming that any website provide information indirectly abetting abortion, like webmd, or even this one for providing the link, or a host (Section 230??), is exposed to private lawsuits (Texas “vigilante-style” now). You can check AviSchiffmann’s Twitter feed for his “rightochoose.us” site. Also, protesters have visited some justices’ homes in the DC area. This may be unlawful and theoretically filming and posting video of such a protest might be unlawful and resort in takedowns. We’ll have to see if things go that way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.