Except for the redistricting ruling, which put the kibosh on Republican legislators' effort to regain their ability to manipulate district boundaries to their own advantage. I wonder how hilarious the dissents were in that one.
Actually you could argue that it's a bad month for women who don't want to be injured or killed during a botched procedure. The two elements of the Texas law were that abortion clinics should be as good as walk-in/walk-out surgical clinics, and that the doctors there should have admitting privileges at a local hospital in case some serious complications arise.
I have to assume you're not actually stupid enough to believe that line. The regulations aren't medically necessary; their only purpose is to subvert Roe v. Wade by piling so many unnecessary regulations on clinics that they can't afford to remain open.
If they can't insure the safety of their pregnant patients, why should they be in business? Since the law affects all such clinics, they can just raise their costs, just like other clinics do under Obamacare.
The regulations have nothing to do with guaranteeing anyone's safety. That's a smokescreen, and it's such a baldfaced lie that it's a wonder anyone can parrot it with a straight face. The Ohio version of this was to require clinics to have "transfer agreements" with a full-service hospital. Completely unnecessary because no hospital would refuse to admit a patient coming in with an emergency; the sole purpose was to give hospitals, many of which are Catholic, veto power over whether a clinic could remain open. Then for good measure, they forbade any hospital run by a public university from entering into such a transfer agreement. To argue that it's about "safety" and not a backdoor way to ban abortion is so intellectually dishonest that it's a wonder the proponents' noses aren't long enough to scratch their own asses.
Someone needs to lock Scalia's liquor cabinet and keep him away from sharp objects for the next little while...
Okay, I'll take a warning for revealing @gturner's RL identity: Tony Perkins: Now That More Gays Will Be Marrying Out-Of-Wedlock Births Will Increase Who wants to volunteer to explain to this turnip where babies come from?
Scalia's dissents are based on the philosophy of judicial restraint, looking at the Constitution's text and the text of the laws and precedents before him to see if they support the case. Roberts philosophy of judicial restraint, in contrast, is to show deference to the elected branches of government and the expressed will of the people, regardless of what clear wording might indicate. Both are conservative, but their visions of "restraint" are at odds.
The federal 3-strikes law, which keeps people in prison for years for minor crimes, has just been overturned by the Supreme Court. LINK Also: A new poll finds that most Americans approve of the recent Supreme Court decision preserving the health care law's subsidized insurance premiums for people in all 50 states. Overall, 62 percent approved, while 32 percent disapproved, said the survey released Wednesday by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation.
Which has zero bearing on whether the decision was the right one (it wasn't). I was never a big fan of three strikes laws myself. They seemed too arbitrary when it comes to sentencing.
If the majority of American's opinions have no bearing on whether the decision was the right one, then neither does yours.
"the Court struck down the “residual clause” of the federal Armed Career Criminal Act as unconstitutionally vague." The ACCA is most certainly a Federal entity. According to every article I've found thus far, the decision involved... "a federal 'three strikes' statute, which subjects a defendant who is convicted as a felon in possession of weapons, to a fifteen-year mandatory minimum imprisonment sentence if he is found also to have three prior serious drug or violent felony convictions."
That's not a Three Strikes law....at least not one of the ones you think it is. Serious drug or violent felony convictions aren't "minor crimes". This more of a violent felon caught with a gun law, and I'm all for it.
