Roe vs Wade vs SCOTUS legitimacy

[hollodero]

(05-12-2022, 08:42 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, the bill is said to be an expansion by its opponents but really isn't one. What is considered to be an expansion is the inclusion of rules that prohibit attempts by states to work around the law under Roe by saying they can't put in place policies that unnecessarily target abortion providers to shut them down as has happened in many states. There is a reason that abortion providers are few and far between in some states under Roe, and it is because of these loopholes that the Senate attempted to close in the bill. It would leave healthcare decisions up to healthcare providers and their patients and would prohibit medically unnecessary burdens put in place by lawmakers.

As for a more narrow bill, it will never pass. The GOP would filibuster any attempt to codify Roe. Manchin and everyone else in the Senate knows this.

I think I understand. It doesn't really change much, replacing expansion with closing loopholes. Democrats could have gotten Manchin and two republicans, but pass on them for they'd rather close loopholes and take the 49-51 instead. I do not see the sense or the benefit in that, including in messaging. By that I do not doubt that closing said loopholes in altering the Roe codification a bit (altering is it?) would be desirable and the right thing. Right time, not so much.

Just my thoughts, for sure. Just looks weird to me.