The removal of a long standing constitutional right is rarely a win for anyone. This is no exception.
What the SCOTUS creates, the SCOTUS can take away. Pro-choice leaders had decades during which to buttress Roe v Wade with statutory guarantees. They did not.
Capt. Obvious would be proud. Just like with McTreason, having the power to do something does not justify the exercise of that power. https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2022...bbs-decision-was-wrong-and-based-on-religion/
The glaring failure is that of the pro-choice leaders, who took no advantage of their many decades of SCOTUS approval to enact legislation.
You are deflecting blame away from where it belongs. That said, in retrospect clearly more could have been done to codify abortion access in to law.
Not at all. Pro-lifers certainly had no obligation to support pro-choice efforts. That obligation rested solely with pro-choice leaders and advocates.
well if you expect people to believe SC justices are regular everyday people, then we all should receive free expensive gifts from time to time, if you cant understand that relevant than you seem to be just the regular RW defender of the lame things republicans continuously do, carry on
I'm hardly RW. I always thought gift-giving was a good thing, not something to be criticized. SCOTUS justices serve at considerable personal financial sacrifice, so it's unsurprising that admiring, wealthy friends should be generous toward them. US Grant, for example, was gifted a house.
I was in the federal government for 34 years, 13 of those as a senior executive. Some gifts were reportable and some were not.