The women justices spoke out about the real consequences of the case, but the decision will likely come down to two men: Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh.
"As Alito went through his argument on this point, he finished one question with his self-satisfied grin and he did this thing — I don’t know that I’ve seen any other justice do it, but he’s done it multiple times — where he looks at his colleagues on each side of him, appearing to be scanning the bench to see if they are as impressed with his question as he is."
Definitely something you don't get when listening to the argument. Thank you for being there.
Also it was pretty striking after Kagan's and Sotomayor's questions/responses to Turner, to hear Barrett basically go "Wait a second!" and it seems at least to me she might have been seriously reconsidering what her position in Dobbs did, and then grilling Turner. Like it was a swift backlash that was unexpected.
These people make my blood boil, treating women like their lives and bodies are disposable and making them third class citizens behind men and fetuses. Unbelievable.
The refence to Alito's facial expressions underlines why SCOTUS should videotape oral arguments.
As to conscience exemptions, the breadth of religious hospitals -- including by necessity in some cases usage by those who are not fellow believers -- is troubling. We are talking high risk cases here. A complete ability to deny abortions is a form of establishment of religion.
Listening during the arguments, Prelogar's exchange with Alito was something. Not sure if it played in the courtroom, but she sounded like she was as close to losing her usual deference to the Court over the last two + years that I've ever heard.
When I heard Turner assert that Idaho law allows an abortion in an emergency based on “a doctor’s good-faith medical judgment,” I immediately thought of a few Idaho doctors I've had whose judgement was heavily influenced by their tribal and cultural backgrounds. And when asked about the possibility of two medical professionals differing in their good-faith medical judgement, Turner seemed to flick the question away. Since the State has already made a law they believe is in good faith, based on their own medical judgement, perhaps there is no room for any other medical judgement but the State's as long as the medical professional concurs. And to quickly comment about Alito, it's really too bad that good-faith legal judgement is in such short supply.
It occurs to me in the part about health of the unborn child to wonder what abortion is. Obviously a C section late in pregnancy isn't. Idaho defines it as a termination "with knowledge that the termination by those means will, with reasonable likelihood, cause the death of the unborn child"
What about the situation where the unborn child (meaning here currently viable) has a condition that MIGHT be fixed if removed and operated on, though the chances are slim, but will certainly result in severe disability or death if the pregnancy continues without intervention--even if the mother's life itself is not threatened? I have in mind things like heart defects, for example. I know that many of those are treated with intrauterine surgery (which presumably has its own risks) but is there EVER a case where removing the fetus gives the child a better chance than other methods?
What gets the most about all of this is these pregnancies are typically not viable. So these male justices, and seemingly the leadership of Idaho and other red states, want to kill or maim women in a defense of a fetus that will die or is already dead.
This isn't about 'protecting unborn children.' This is about state oppression of women. Even Barrett recognizes this. Maybe.
Prediction time? Four women to uphold the district court, probably joined by father of daughters Kavanaugh, plus Roberts so he can assign the opinion and look like a good guy (and b/c the case cuts across class lines).
When you are attending a SC hearing, how do you record the direct quotes in your articles? I am guessing you can’t take a phone into the court. Do you use old school pad and pencil?
"As Alito went through his argument on this point, he finished one question with his self-satisfied grin and he did this thing — I don’t know that I’ve seen any other justice do it, but he’s done it multiple times — where he looks at his colleagues on each side of him, appearing to be scanning the bench to see if they are as impressed with his question as he is."
Definitely something you don't get when listening to the argument. Thank you for being there.
Also it was pretty striking after Kagan's and Sotomayor's questions/responses to Turner, to hear Barrett basically go "Wait a second!" and it seems at least to me she might have been seriously reconsidering what her position in Dobbs did, and then grilling Turner. Like it was a swift backlash that was unexpected.
These people make my blood boil, treating women like their lives and bodies are disposable and making them third class citizens behind men and fetuses. Unbelievable.
Thanks for providing the color on Alito. F***ing Son of Sam. 😡
The refence to Alito's facial expressions underlines why SCOTUS should videotape oral arguments.
As to conscience exemptions, the breadth of religious hospitals -- including by necessity in some cases usage by those who are not fellow believers -- is troubling. We are talking high risk cases here. A complete ability to deny abortions is a form of establishment of religion.
Chris, does EMTALA cover all
stages of pregnancy?
As for Alito, he needs a uterus.😉
Listening during the arguments, Prelogar's exchange with Alito was something. Not sure if it played in the courtroom, but she sounded like she was as close to losing her usual deference to the Court over the last two + years that I've ever heard.
I looked up EMTALA coverage
and it's any condition that comes into the ER deemed an
emergency.
I'm happy to disagree with Alito and any ER physician in
Idaho, but they took an oath
to do no harm. If a pregnant woman is bleeding heavily
with other physical signs she's in jeopardy, EMTALA
or not, the darn doctor better
take care of her, no matter
what it entails.
I like Dr. Kevita Patel’s take that lawyers think they are doctors and doctors now need to think more like a lawyer! GO FIGURE
When I heard Turner assert that Idaho law allows an abortion in an emergency based on “a doctor’s good-faith medical judgment,” I immediately thought of a few Idaho doctors I've had whose judgement was heavily influenced by their tribal and cultural backgrounds. And when asked about the possibility of two medical professionals differing in their good-faith medical judgement, Turner seemed to flick the question away. Since the State has already made a law they believe is in good faith, based on their own medical judgement, perhaps there is no room for any other medical judgement but the State's as long as the medical professional concurs. And to quickly comment about Alito, it's really too bad that good-faith legal judgement is in such short supply.
I’m happy to hear that Justice Barret seems to now understand the consequences of her decision on women’s lives.
It occurs to me in the part about health of the unborn child to wonder what abortion is. Obviously a C section late in pregnancy isn't. Idaho defines it as a termination "with knowledge that the termination by those means will, with reasonable likelihood, cause the death of the unborn child"
What about the situation where the unborn child (meaning here currently viable) has a condition that MIGHT be fixed if removed and operated on, though the chances are slim, but will certainly result in severe disability or death if the pregnancy continues without intervention--even if the mother's life itself is not threatened? I have in mind things like heart defects, for example. I know that many of those are treated with intrauterine surgery (which presumably has its own risks) but is there EVER a case where removing the fetus gives the child a better chance than other methods?
What gets the most about all of this is these pregnancies are typically not viable. So these male justices, and seemingly the leadership of Idaho and other red states, want to kill or maim women in a defense of a fetus that will die or is already dead.
This isn't about 'protecting unborn children.' This is about state oppression of women. Even Barrett recognizes this. Maybe.
"... their citizens, not the federal government['s]."
Prediction time? Four women to uphold the district court, probably joined by father of daughters Kavanaugh, plus Roberts so he can assign the opinion and look like a good guy (and b/c the case cuts across class lines).
When you are attending a SC hearing, how do you record the direct quotes in your articles? I am guessing you can’t take a phone into the court. Do you use old school pad and pencil?