Well, it's official

[james_davis_nicoll]

American women are now legally livestock. I wonder how long it will take before their access to passports and foreign travel is removed.

Comments

[philrm]

I don't disagree with any of that, but the Supreme Court can't simply declare ex nihilo that the 19th Amendment is unconstitutional; they have to have a case which involves it. That means that some state legislature has to pass a law that either conflicts with the 19th Amendment, or at least gives the right-wing radicals on the Court a fig leaf to claim that it does. I'm not aware of any such case, anywhere. (Although give the howler monkeys in the Texas GOP a couple of more years and I'd say there's a shot.) Meanwhile, Obergefell, Lawrence, and Griswold are just sitting right there on the table, so to speak. So, for that matter, is Loving, which, like Griswold, is barely older than Roe. I wonder how long it will be before Thomas's allies decide he's outlived his usefulness?

ETA: And all three of those cases are directly related to the same establishment of the right to privacy that has just been torpedoed by the Six, as has been pointed out repeatedly.

[graydon]

In the event that the non-voting majority keeps not voting (voting being declasse and icky), they're going to have enough of a majority in Congress to just pass laws. If the Supremes say it's constitutional, it's constitutional, and they can say that in days if so inclined. They've already laid the groundwork for saying Joe is not legitimately elected (thus lacks a real veto) and they've had their practice coup.

Nobody is getting up and doing some variant on "you can't own women" or treating the problem as an access-to-agency general struggle between a "generally distributed" position and a "all the agency is mine" position, either; I do not have a lot of hope for the utility of the response.

[philrm]

I would argue that it's a bit more complicated than that - except I won't bother, because we're really just arguing about the exact timescale.

If the past couple of days aren't enough to get people to vote this November, then I don't know what will, and in any case, it won't matter: if the Democrats don't expand their hold of Congress in the upcoming midterms, they won't get another chance.

Odds are, though, that the Republicans will take control of Congress, because, evidently, the majority of voters would rather register their anger over $5/gallon gasoline than live in a democracy.