Tumgik
#griswold v connecticut
kaleidoscope-vol2 · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media
Fascism, baby.
3K notes · View notes
Text
A nice succinct summary. And when Justice Thomas, with his white wife, is no longer with us, will SCOTUS decide that Loving v. Virginia is also one of those "demonstrably erroneous decisions"? Stay tuned...
8 notes · View notes
strongintherealgay · 2 years
Text
with roe v wade officially being overturned, I'm going to be getting an iud before griswold v connecticut is also overturned. I've already been looking into it because of pcos and related health concerns, but I'm also terrified of what's to come
4 notes · View notes
filosofablogger · 28 days
Text
Filosofa's Fury
It is 1:00 a.m. where I live.  One of the three human family members, daughter Chris, is fast asleep, for she gets up at 5:00 a.m. every morning to go to her job.  All four furry family members are asleep in their respective happy places (one on my lap).  And the other human family member (besides myself, that is) is chatting online with her friends.  Therefore, it would be disruptive, to say the…
Tumblr media
View On WordPress
0 notes
plitnick · 2 years
Text
Time’s Up. We Can’t Compromise Our Values Any Longer
Time’s Up. We Can’t Compromise Our Values Any Longer
With the demise of Roe v Wade, and the pathetic response from Democrats from Biden and Pelosi on down, it’s alarm bell time. I make the case that so-called “strategic voting” has been a disaster and that the left side of the American political spectrum, from the left-of-center liberals to the radical left, must vote our values and vote in leaders who share and will defend them. We simply can’t…
Tumblr media
View On WordPress
1 note · View note
Text
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has mocked Colorado Representative Lauren Boebert after she claimed she had her third son because birth control was too expensive.
“I left a prescription at a pharmacy once. I went to get birth control,” she said during a hearing on Tuesday 23 May. “I was there at the counter, went to pay for it, and the price was very, very high. I said wow, is this a three-, six-month prescription? They said, no ma’am, this is one month. I said it’s chapter to have a kid. And I left it there, and now I have my third son, Kaydon Boebert, and so it actually turned out to be a really great thing.”
The Democratic congresswoman took issue with the story, noting how Ms. Boebert had voted against legislation that would help ensure wider access to contraception.
“And then she voted against the right to contraception so she could double this problem and give it to the next person,” she wrote on Twitter on Tuesday.
Tumblr media
Last year, Ms. Boebert, alongside most of the House GOP, voted against the Right to Contraception Act, which would’ve enshrined the right to contraception in federal law.
Rep. Kathy Castor of Florida, one of the bill’s sponsors, said the bill was important as women are facing "a perilous time, where an extremist Supreme Court and the GOP are rolling back our rights."
Democratic lawmakers rallied around the bill after US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas suggested in a concurring opinion to the decision overturning Roe v Wade that the high court should revisit 1965’s Griswold v Connecticut, which forbids states from banning contraception.
“Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous’... we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents,” Justice Thomas wrote. “The question would remain whether other constitutional provisions guarantee the myriad rights that our substantive due process cases have generated.”
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, a majority of women between ages 18 to 64 have used contraception at some point during their reproductive years, with more than three-quarters using multiple methods.
Under the Affordable Care Act, contraceptive coverage is required, though KFF found in 2022 that 4 in 10 women weren’t aware most insurance plans pay the full cost of birth control.
40 notes · View notes
xkcdbracket · 9 months
Text
Supreme Court Bracket
Remember that this is a silly Tumblr poll, and these two things are not actually in conflict. So don't get too heated in the notes.
Tumblr media Tumblr media
Public Defenders. In the case Gideon v. Wainwright the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that states are required under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to provide an attorney or lawyer to defendants in criminal cases who are unable to afford their own attorneys.
Birth Control. In the case Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Court ruled that a statute barring birth control to prevent pregnancy, also known as contraception, was unconstitutional, at least in its application to married couples, as there was an implicit right to privacy in the ''penumbras'' and ''emanations'' of other constitutional provisions. This ruling was used as precedent in Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972), which extended the right to unmarried couples, and in Roe v. Wade and Lawrence v. Texas (see below).
7 notes · View notes
professorsta · 2 years
Text
Just want any queer elder to know it’s Not Normal for young queers to not know their history. I’ve been seeing a lot of posts with young queers knowing very little of our past and I- I just want to reassure that I’m 19 with 18-23 year old queer friends who deeply know and understand our history. We know that Sodomy laws caused men to be chemically castrated, we know that sometimes all it took was seeming queer for police to be busting down your door, we know about the lavender scare and we know that the reason our oldest members in the community hit 40-50 is because of Reagan. We know and we’re Sorry so many have forgotten, we’re sorry you fought with blood, sweat, and tears only to have those you fought for not even know a war had been going on in the first place. We Thank you for fighting for us and I promise to continue to fight for our community so your efforts are never in vain
139 notes · View notes
shrimpmandan · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
They're not stopping at abortion, by the way.
This is what y'all wanted, right?
56 notes · View notes
kittcattastrophe · 2 years
Text
Roe v Wade was protected under the 14th amendment. Here are other things the 14th amendment says/ protects.
* All persons born or naturalized in the United States,” thereby granting citizenship to formerly enslaved people.
* 1954 ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court overturned the “separate but equal” doctrine established in Plessy v. Ferguson, ruling that segregated public schools did in fact violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
* The use of contraception (1965’s Griswold v. Connecticut)
* The right to interracial marriage (1967’s Loving v. Virginia)
* The right to same-sex marriage (2015’s Obergefell v. Hodges)
* Protection from racial discrimination/ discrimination based on gender or sexuality
* The right to Due Process
*HIPPA laws
* The right to engage in intimate sexual conduct (Lawrence v Texas 2003) ie: sex outside of marriage/same sex sexual acts
* Your right to vote if you aren't a white male
Y'all just opened a whole can of worms.
50 notes · View notes
yessoupy · 2 years
Text
please reblog.
a friend from my volunteer life messaged me to say she's moving back to texas and asked what advocacy groups she should join. this is what i told her:
if your precinct is vacant, become the precinct chair for your county democratic party.
begin attending meetings of the local democratic club.
these are political problems that require political action. precinct chairs are the officials who get out the democratic vote. that is NECESSARY for slowing this roll of fascism. IS THAT ALL WE NEED TO DO? NO. But that is the bare minimum.
Don't feel like a Democrat? Well, neither do I. But I sure as fuck am not a Republican. That party is trending further and further to the extreme right. As a result, it is leaving people behind. In a two-party system, if you are not a Republican, you should be voting for the Democrats. The Democratic Party is increasing in the breadth of people who belong to it simply because of how many people look at the Republicans today and said, "I didn't sign up for this shit." THIS WILL CAUSE IDEOLOGICAL CLASHES WITHIN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. No candidate for any race is going to be perfect.
Do not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good when "good" is simply "not a fascist."
I am BEGGING you -- take this advice! I have taught the destruction of the Weimar Republic too many times to sit here and complain about a candidate not being progressive enough for my vote and/or dollar donation. I am not asking you to do anything I am not already doing.
You have learned about awful historical events and thought to yourself, "I wonder what I would have done." You know the answer now. DO IT.
20 notes · View notes
sbrown82 · 2 years
Link
What a fucking piece of shit!
14 notes · View notes
britts-galaxy-brain · 2 years
Text
I'm not sure which has been harder to deal with over the past couple of days. The blatant stripping of human rights (don't come at me with "They turned it to the statez!!" bullshit, they know goddamn well this is a human rights issue and the states aligned with their twisted beliefs will criminalize it as soon as they can get away with doing so), the stripping of marriage equality and contraceptives being next, the fact that "Justice" Thomas intentionally skipped over the case that directly applies to him (interracial marriage), or the apathetic, ignorant, disgusting comments I've been seeing from average people.
I'm fucking tired. Precedents are being set and I'm so. Completely. Fucking. Tired. Damn near everything in my almost 30 years of living both on a societal scale and my own personal scale has been a fight and I'm SICK OF IT! HOW HARD IS IT TO GIVE A FUCK ABOUT PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF YOURSELF?! HOW HARD IS IT TO LISTEN TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES AND WORLDVIEWS?! HOW HARD IS IT TO BE A DECENT GODDAMN PERSON?!
I'm angry. I'm tired. I'm feeling dread and hopelessness and have been for years. Just...fuck.
18 notes · View notes
anamericangirl · 2 years
Note
What is your opinion on Griswold vs Connecticut?
I agree with the idea of Griswold that people should be able to have and use contraceptives, but I would support the overturning of that ruling too if it ever comes to the table. And that's because the job of the Supreme Court is to interpret and make rulings on issues that come up that conflict with the Constitution but anything not in the Constitution is not up to the Supreme Court.
The 10th Amendment says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
The right to contraception is not a constitutionally protected right and is, therefore, an issue for each state to respectively decide.
The Supreme Court has been far too liberal with the 14th Amendment and used it to make rulings on issues, such as contraceptive, that they don't have the power to do. So in my opinion Griswold needs to go and it needs to be up to the states. And if people are worried about what decisions their state will make then they should get more involved in politics at the state level.
12 notes · View notes
vespertinecat · 2 years
Text
These Christo-fascist folks in power taking away our rights and gradually sending us back centuries towards a darker era really don't seem to remember what people used to do when they were upset with their leaders back then, do they?
9 notes · View notes
Text
Facebook and Instagram have begun promptly removing posts that offer abortion pills to women who may not be able to access them following a Supreme Court decision that stripped away constitutional protections for the procedure.
Such social media posts ostensibly aimed to help women living in states where preexisting laws banning abortion suddenly snapped into effect on Friday. That’s when the high court overruled Roe v. Wade, its 1973 decision that declared access to abortion a constitutional right.
Memes and status updates explaining how women could legally obtain abortion pills in the mail exploded across social platforms. Some even offered to mail the prescriptions to women living in states that now ban the procedure.
Almost immediately, Facebook and Instagram began removing some of these posts, just as millions across the U.S. were searching for clarity around abortion access. General mentions of abortion pills, as well as posts mentioning specific versions such as mifepristone and misoprostol, suddenly spiked Friday morning across Twitter, Facebook, Reddit and TV broadcasts, according to an analysis by the media intelligence firm Zignal Labs.
By Sunday, Zignal had counted more than 250,000 such mentions.
The AP obtained a screenshot on Friday of one Instagram post from a woman who offered to purchase or forward abortion pills through the mail, minutes after the court ruled to overturn the constitutional right to an abortion.
“DM me if you want to order abortion pills, but want them sent to my address instead of yours,” the post on Instagram read.
Instagram took it down within moments. Vice Media first reported on Monday that Meta, the parent of both Facebook and Instagram, was taking down posts about abortion pills.
On Monday, an AP reporter tested how the company would respond to a similar post on Facebook, writing: “If you send me your address, I will mail you abortion pills.”
The post was removed within one minute.
The Facebook account was immediately put on a “warning” status for the post, which Facebook said violated its standards on “guns, animals and other regulated goods.”
Yet, when the AP reporter made the same exact post but swapped out the words “abortion pills” for “a gun,” the post remained untouched. A post with the same exact offer to mail “weed” was also left up and not considered a violation.
Marijuana is illegal under federal law and it is illegal to send it through the mail.
Abortion pills, however, can legally be obtained through the mail after an online consultation from prescribers who have undergone certification and training.
In an email, a Meta spokesperson pointed to company policies that prohibit the sale of certain items, including guns, alcohol, drugs and pharmaceuticals. The company did not explain the apparent discrepancies in its enforcement of that policy.
Meta spokesperson Andy Stone confirmed in a tweet Monday that the company will not allow individuals to gift or sell pharmaceuticals on its platform, but will allow content that shares information on how to access pills. Stone acknowledged some problems with enforcing that policy across its platforms, which include Facebook and Instagram.
“We’ve discovered some instances of incorrect enforcement and are correcting these,” Stone said in the tweet.
Attorney General Merrick Garland said Friday that states should not ban mifepristone, the medication used to induce an abortion.
“States may not ban mifepristone based on disagreement with the FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy,” Garland said in a Friday statement.
But some Republicans have already tried to stop their residents from obtaining abortion pills through the mail, with some states like West Virginia and Tennessee prohibiting providers from prescribing the medication through telemedicine consultation.
35 notes · View notes