On the first day of its new term, the U.S. Supreme Court in an unsigned opinion upheld a lower court ruling that enforces Texas’ ban on certain emergency abortions. The Biden administration had sought to overturn the ban and enforce its policy requiring hospitals to perform the emergency, potentiall...
  • dcpDarkMatter@kbin.earth
    21·
    22 days ago

    Decades ago, the parties were much different than today. There were pro-choice Republicans and pro-life Democrats. Only one time in recent (2000+) memory did the Dems ever have the 60 votes necessary for codifying Roe. They used that two-ish week window to pass the ACA.

    And that’s not even touching on the differing public approval of abortion.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      6·
      22 days ago

      The ACA which should be noted was desperately needed at the time unlike Roe which was known to be at risk but not nearly as immediate.

      I’m not happy Roe is dead. The fact is though that without a constitutional amendment Roe was always on borrowed time with the constant attacks on it, and I don’t believe that there is any time after the issuance of the bill of rights that an amendment protecting abortion would work, and in the form of the bill of rights it would’ve had to be a robust privacy amendment that just happened to protect abortion.

    • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
      114·
      22 days ago

      They used that two-ish week window to pass the ACA.

      The ACA was passed in March 2010. Obama took office more than a year earlier. The bill to codify Roe was written in 2003, all that it needed was a vote, which Pelosi refused.

      Your revisionist history is wrong.

      • dcpDarkMatter@kbin.earth
        3·
        21 days ago

        No revisionist history. Pelosi refused to bring it to the floor because she didn’t have the votes. There’s lots of stuff to criticize her on, but whipping and vote counting aren’t that.

        Do you remember 2000 - 2006? We had the Republicans floating and pushing anti-marriage freedom constitutional amendments. They controlled the House, Senate, and White House. Republicans controlled the 107th, 108th, and 109th congresses. So while Pelosi could have proposed the Act, there’s no guarantee Hastert (the Republican Speaker) would have even have allowed that on the floor.

        • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
          17·
          21 days ago

          She refused a vote while SHE was speaker. And if you remember correctly it was Bill Clinton that signed DOMA with Pelosi as House leader which restricted our marriages.

          • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
            2·
            21 days ago
            Introduced in the House as H.R. 3396 by Bob Barr (R–GA) on May 7, 1996.   
Committee consideration by House Judiciary.   
Passed the House on July 12, 1996 (342–67).   
Passed the Senate on September 10, 1996 (85–14).   
Signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996.

            I don’t know if you know this or not. I should hope you do, because it’s a fundamental part of our democracy…but a presidents veto power is not absolute. Veto could be overridden with 2/3 vote in house and Senate, which they clearly had support for.

            Yeah the house and Senate were (barely) dem controlled at the time…but Bill Clinton is clearly the wrong scapegoat for DOMA.

          • dcpDarkMatter@kbin.earth
            1·
            21 days ago

            Right, if she didn’t have the votes, she wouldn’t bring it to the floor. Simple as that. She didn’t not bring it up because she wasn’t supportive of the LGBT+ community.

            And bringing up DOMA, which was passed in 1996, at least get your facts straight. Republicans controlled the House when DOMA was passed. Pelosi was not the Democratic leader in the House then; that was Dick Gephart. Yes, Clinton signed it. However, there was much more public support for the bill then.