The Supreme Court prompts the question: Who gets rights in America?

  • 📰 YahooNews
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 98 sec. here
  • 3 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 42%
  • Publisher: 59%

Law Law Headlines News

Law Law Latest News,Law Law Headlines

As the implications of the court's abortion decision continued to reverberate across a divided country on Saturday, many of whose who decried the ruling expressed mounting worry that it would not simply restrict abortion access.

Amy Martin was 14 years old when Roe v. Wade was decided, establishing a right to abortion that she took for granted for nearly five decades. Martin was 56 when the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in 2015, a right she took advantage of when she married her partner of 30 years last year.

In interviews, many Americans described alarm that a nation proud of its hard-won expansion of protections for people never acknowledged by its White, male founders had begun to feel more like an unfamiliar land where established rights may melt away in its highest court. The prospect was all the more disturbing, some said, because polls have found a majority of Americans support abortion rights and same-sex marriage.

Those other rights, the dissenters wrote, are "all part of the same constitutional fabric," noting that 19th century laws also did not protect the Supreme Court-recognized rights to interracial marriage or to not be sterilized without consent. They wrote that they "cannot understand how anyone can be confident that today's opinion will be the last of its kind."

Thomas's "potential retort would be that that violates the Equal Protection clause, because it's race-based discrimination," Skinner-Thompson said. "The problem is that if you take the originalists' interpretation at face value and say: 'What were the practices of this country at the time of the ratification of the 14th Amendment after the Civil War?' Guess what? There was race discrimination all over the place.

Should their marriage be invalidated, they decided, they need the strongest possible evidence that they are both Liesel's parents - despite the fact that Vania provided the embryo and Rachel gave birth to Liesel. "After yesterday, we're like, maybe now we need to rethink. Because nobody thought this was going to happen, and it did," Vania said.

"With every appointment [former president Donald] Trump made to the Supreme Court, I felt like all of these things are under threat," Fowler said, adding that the appointments constructed "a slippery slope" and overturning Roe "felt like an inevitability."

 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.

Not women

Pregnancy is preventable

We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 380. in LAW

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Kirk Franklin and Marsai Martin are winners again at the 2022 BET AwardsOther stars used their acceptance speeches or introductions to speak out against the Supreme Court’s abortion ruling.
Source: dallasnews - 🏆 18. / 71 Read more »

LGBTQ Californians worry they will be next to lose rights after Roe decisionMany fear LGBTQ rights will be the Supreme Court's next target Yes, they are next. Unborn babies gained rights, the Californians shouldn't worry so much. 🇧🇷💯🙏🙏🙏
Source: latimes - 🏆 11. / 82 Read more »