-
Test Your Memetic Expertise With 'Pattern Recognition Test' Abstractions -
The Idea Of 'Biblically Accurate Angels' Scared Both Christians And Non-Christians Alike -
'The Creepypasta Song' Has Some Banger Lines, Including, 'I'm ProJared And I Cheated On My Wife!' -
People Are Done With Media Franchises That Rely On 'Hype Moments and Aura' -
H3H3Productions' Twitch Account Banned For 'Glorifying Violence' For Looping The Hasan Piker 'Content Nuke'
-23
LET ME KILL BABIES FOR MY HEALTH!!!!!!!!11
Uploaded by Trixie Jensen Jun 27, 2022 at 12:22PM EDT
Origin Entry: 2022 Supreme Court Overturning of Roe v. Wade
File type: jpg
Resolution: (1080px x 1078px)
File size: 160 KB
Moar:
-23
2022 Supreme Court Overturning of Roe v. Wade - LET ME KILL BABIES FOR MY HEALTH!!!!!!!!11
| ◄ Previous | View Gallery Random Image | Next ► |
![Matt Ford @fordm In a solo concurring opinion, Thomas says the court should reconsider rulings that protect contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage. Cite as: 597 U. S. (2022) 3 THOMAS, J., concurring 381 U. S. 479 (1965) (right of married persons to obtain con- traceptives)*; Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U. S. 558 (2003) (right to engage in private, consensual sexual acts); and Oberge- fell v. Hodges, 576 U. S. 644 (2015) (right to same-sex mar- riage), are not at issue. The Court's abortion cases are unique, see ante, at 31-32, 66, 71-72, and no party has asked us to decide "whether our entire Fourteenth Amend- ment jurisprudence must be preserved or revised," McDon- ald, 561 U. S., at 813 (opinion of THOMAS, J.). Thus, I agree that "[n]othing in [the Court's] opinion should be under- stood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abor- tion." Ante, at 66. 19 For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, includ- ing Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any sub- stantive due process decision is "demonstrably erroneous," Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U. S. (2020) (THOMAS, J., concurring in judgment) (slip op., at 7), we have a duty to "correct the error" established in those precedents, Gamble v. United States, 587 U. S. (2019) (THOMAS, J., con- curring) (slip op., at 9). After overruling these demonstra- bly erroneous decisions, the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions guarantee the myr- iad rights that our substantive due process cases have gen- erated. For example, we could consider whether any of the rights announced in this Court's substantive due process cases are "privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Amdt. :](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/list/002/392/454/11f.png "Justice Clarence Thomas Suggests Overturning Gay Marriage")
Comments (31)
Add a Comment
Image Details
2,323 views (8 from today)
Uploaded Jun 27, 2022 at 12:22PM EDT
Origin Entry
Tags
About the Uploader
Trixie Jensen
Scrapbooker & Commentator
Top Comments
SardonicRainboom
Jun 27, 2022 at 12:28PM EDT
ghost of aerie
Jun 28, 2022 at 12:26PM EDT in reply to