Shaka, when the walls fell
So, Alito’s in.
Over at firedoglake, they’re looking on the bright side, suggesting that the last-minute, netroots-driven support for a filibuster revealed some tipping point of exasperation in the populace. The theme is that we’re in a good position for the next round. ReddHedd says:
Okay, so it’s obvious there is cloture today. It sucks. But it happens in the big leagues that sometimes you lose an inning. That doesn’t mean you stop playing, it just means you take a deep breath and go back to the dugout for some fresh plays.
I don’t mean to sound all negative here, but…WHAT?
This wasn’t an inning. There aren’t any more innings. The Supreme Court is locked now, Roe is gone, civil rights are in peril. The upcoming fight over the wiretapping will have no effect on what has just gone down. We lost, and we’re screwed.
You can talk all you want about how this is just the “first skirmish” and we’re gonna be loaded for bear next time. There is no fucking next time. The Supreme Court is gone. Roe is gone. Women’s rights are gone. FISA hearings don’t mean jack.
It’s gone, people. We’re screwed.
21 Responses to “Shaka, when the walls fell”
-
Burrow says:
Maybe they’re right?
I’m not hopeful about it, though. Maybe he’ll have a heart attack? Anyone know his medical history?
January 30th, 2006 at 10:27 pm EST -
norbizness says:
Sorry to intrude, but Roe will be gone if Stevens dies and is replaced by a Roberts/Alito clone. As it stands, assuming that both recent appointees would vote to overturn Roe, the count is still only 4 (Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito).
-
Violet Socks says:
You’re not intruding — I’m delighted to see you here. I probably just need to be talked off the ledge. This thing has hit me hard.
-
Alon Levy says:
If there’s a challenge to Roe, then it’s fairly obvious Scalia, Thomas, and Alito will vote for it. However, I’m not that sure about Kennedy and Thomas. Kennedy is to O’Connor’s right on abortion, but he’s no Alito; Roberts is personally anti-abortion, but he seems too bureaucratic to reverse precedent so easily.
I’m going to venture and predict that not only will a court with Alito not reverse Roe vs. Wade, but also if Stevens dies in a few months then the resulting court will not reverse Roe vs. Wade.
-
manxome says:
It’s not an “inning” when half the team doesn’t show up to the stadium. When most of the the half that does just sits in the dugout. When all of them placed bets on the other team.
It’s like they’re victims of abuse. Buying the promise that it will get better, that they tried but the urge to damage was just too strong, that they really do love you.
-
Txfeminist says:
I’m totally upset about this. I keep trying to think up reasons why it won’t be as bad as it is going to be, and each time I get stymied. I should really just stop trying to convince myself it won’t be as bad as I think it will be.
I predict a black market will arise for mifepristone. (RU-486)
(It’s legal now in some places although no one can/will tell you that, but I expect it to be retracted with the end of Roe.)
My small, pathetic hope is that if such a black market does arise- at the very least we will be spared the deaths by coat hanger, botched surgeries, etc.
It’s small, small, smallsmallsmall hope.
-
Burrow says:
And there will be people like me who will smuggle it across the border (assuming that it ever gets out of clinical trials and approved in Canada)
-
Dr Marco says:
I think that progressives should work now in education, so that the future generation of America grows free from superstition and loaded with the real values of tolerance, social justice and human rights.
-
Violet Socks says:
Word, Dr. Marco.
Alon and norbizness, I have no faith in Kennedy as a swing vote. And I’m expecting Roberts to definitely vote to overturn. Roberts isn’t a bureaucrat so much as he’s pure snake-oil, oozing on about stare decisis just so he can get his snaky self on the court. He’s a creep. He’s a smarter creep than Scalito, but still a creep.
-
Alon Levy says:
What do you think the ramifications will be if Roe vs. Wade is reversed, and a handful of Northeastern and West Coast states once again provide abortions for the entire country?
-
Violet Socks says:
Underground Railroad.
-
Burrow says:
Hell Yeah!
-
Alon Levy says:
Out of 1 million American women who abort every year right now, how many do you think will not be able to get abort, or to abort safely, if Roe vs. Wade is reversed?
-
Violet Socks says:
Before Roe, a million women a year got abortions, and over a thousand died from complications (versus about a dozen a year now who die). My post from a couple of weeks ago was about life before Roe:
$1000 in Cash, A Quickie, Then You Die
What’s hard to quantify is the enormous degradation, desperation, and financial hardship women experienced.Before Roe about 100,000 women traveled to New York every year just to get an abortion, since that was one of the few places it was legal. A lot of people think that the climate will be worse this time around, since the national zeitgeist is moving into conservatism, rather than moving into liberalism, and there’s a well-organized national movement against abortion. Women may be aggressively prosecuted.
-
Burrow says:
But we’ll all write lots of letters to those who get caught, right?
-
Violet Socks says:
I really think we’ll need to organize some kind of national helpline for women stranded in no-abortion states. Underground railroad, legal assistance, travel assistance, financial assistance.
-
Burrow says:
Definitely. I’m comfortably nestled right on the US/Canadian border (BC-very liberal no less) and I would do whatever I could to get people there (or anywhere else) that they could get safe abortions.
-
Alon Levy says:
Scalia said once that he believed abortion was a state issue and that he’d strike down a federal abortion ban. In most liberal states there won’t be enough votes for a ban, so if Roe is overturned, the climate will be more similar to what it was in 1971 than to what it was in the 1950s and 60s, when abortion was illegal in every state.
Do you know what precedent says about prosecuting people in state A for doing something in state B that is legal in B but illegal in A?
-
Violet Socks says:
Alon, I’m not sure of your point, but the 100,000 women a year travelling to New York is from the years 1970-1972, the $1000 upfront cash is from the late 60s, and the annual deaths from abortion (1000 in the 50s) are thought to be actually higher in the late 60s/early 70s, but it’s difficult to nail down statistics surrounding illegal activities.
If Roe is overturned, the legal situation will be like the early 70s with abortion being legal in some states. But politically, the situations seem very different to me. In the early 70s there was a national movement to legalize abortion. Today there is national movement to outlaw abortion — and it’s far more powerful and well-financed than the women’s movement of the early 70s.
Also: Scalia is Satan.
-
Alon Levy says:
First, in general when Scalia says something, he means it. His problem is that the opposite, namely that he doesn’t listen to advocates’ arguments before coming to a position. Plus, I think the chance Kennedy will leave in place a comprehensive national ban on abortion is nil.
Second, I don’t really have a point; I’m trying to see how many women an overturning of Roe – which I still think is improbable, albeit plausible – will affect. I’m willing to accept “75 million” (the approximate number of fertile American women) as a figure; I just want to verify it.
Third, are there any statistics about mortality from abortion in the states where it was legal before 1973?
-
Catherine N.X. says:
I never thought I’d seriously consider living outside the U.S.
I was mistaken.
And shame on me for seeing the subject line and immediately understanding what it meant.
::polishes her Delta Shield pin and bat’leth::
