navan
/
Daily-Dose
mirror of https://github.com/navanchauhan/Daily-Dose.git
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity
Daily-Dose/archive-daily-dose/25 June, 2022.html

491 lines
64 KiB
HTML
Raw Normal View History

Added daily report
2022-06-25 13:51:40 +01:00
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="" xml:lang="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head>
<meta charset="utf-8"/>
<meta content="pandoc" name="generator"/>
<meta content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, user-scalable=yes" name="viewport"/>
<title>25 June, 2022</title>
<style type="text/css">
code{white-space: pre-wrap;}
span.smallcaps{font-variant: small-caps;}
span.underline{text-decoration: underline;}
div.column{display: inline-block; vertical-align: top; width: 50%;}
</style>
<title>Daily-Dose</title><meta content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0" name="viewport"/><link href="styles/simple.css" rel="stylesheet"/><link href="../styles/simple.css" rel="stylesheet"/><style>*{overflow-x:hidden;}</style><link href="https://unpkg.com/aos@2.3.1/dist/aos.css" rel="stylesheet"/><script src="https://unpkg.com/aos@2.3.1/dist/aos.js"></script></head>
<body>
<h1 data-aos="fade-down" id="daily-dose">Daily-Dose</h1>
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" data-aos-anchor-placement="top-bottom" id="contents">Contents</h1>
<ul>
<li><a href="#from-new-yorker">From New Yorker</a></li>
<li><a href="#from-vox">From Vox</a></li>
<li><a href="#from-the-hindu-sports">From The Hindu: Sports</a></li>
<li><a href="#from-the-hindu-national-news">From The Hindu: National News</a></li>
<li><a href="#from-bbc-europe">From BBC: Europe</a></li>
<li><a href="#from-ars-technica">From Ars Technica</a></li>
<li><a href="#from-jokes-subreddit">From Jokes Subreddit</a></li>
</ul>
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-new-yorker">From New Yorker</h1>
<ul>
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>We’re Not Going Back to the Time Before Roe. We’re Going Somewhere Worse</strong> - We are entering an era not just of unsafe abortions but of the widespread criminalization of pregnancy. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/07/04/we-are-not-going-back-to-the-time-before-roe-we-are-going-somewhere-worse">link</a></p></li>
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>What the Supreme Court’s Gun Ruling Means for New York</strong> - On Thursday, a conservative majority struck down a hundred-and-eleven-year-old gun law restricting the ability to carry handguns outside of the home. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-local-correspondents/what-the-supreme-courts-gun-ruling-means-for-new-york">link</a></p></li>
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>What It Means to Be Targeted by the President</strong> - Witnesses at the latest January 6th hearings share an experience that, since Donald Trump, has become a hallmark of politics: being terrorized by the full modern machinery of American hate-mongering. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/what-it-means-to-be-targeted-by-the-president">link</a></p></li>
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>When the Supreme Court Takes Away a Long-Held Constitutional Right</strong> - The crude reality of the political machinations involved in overruling Roe v. Wade makes it galling to read the Court’s self-portrayal as a picture of proper judicial restraint. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/when-the-supreme-court-takes-away-a-long-held-constitutional-right">link</a></p></li>
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Who Was Willing to Stand with Donald Trump?</strong> - The January 6th committee is exposing how unflinching loyalty to Trump remains the great schism in the Republican Party. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-political-scene/who-was-willing-to-stand-with-donald-trump">link</a></p></li>
</ul>
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-vox">From Vox</h1>
<ul>
<li><strong>The economic case for abortion rights</strong> -
<figure>
<img alt="An illustration of a woman with a brown ponytail and gray sweatshirt holding a broken piggy bank in her hands." src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/qnOFILxLxslDradmhOZzKDRaqQg=/392x0:2960x1926/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/71015337/abortion_econHEADER.0.jpg"/>
<figcaption>
Illustrations by Aubrey Hirsch
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
Being able to access abortion is about all kinds of justice — economic justice included.
</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Pp2EUG6hQJADH9IfbfdrPtSIbpQ=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650286/abortion_econPanel_1.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/loMlvdB3w-ErPf6qr_mxUx9VAVg=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650290/abortion_econPanel_2.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/KqKVuQg3Jy0q1DZfYQ7A-lvTGx8=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650294/abortion_econPanel_3.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/lOfL2n0ahRIMJueeP9YlkT0Xz4Q=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650295/abortion_econPanel_4.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/irBDCluJCe2vXCSBcFEO3ehcy78=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650297/abortion_econPanel_5.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/06ZrSk3XBqGnS87rgtDyp0h98T0=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650303/abortion_econPanel_6.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/k-n-arJfmyaW1BAkSTZXUX-F4e4=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650346/abortion_econPanel_7.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/R7Kg2GWx1mXhwkY_3nnpFOlYfwI=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650374/abortion_econPanel_8__1_.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/oz0bvcdJVe5UKELu3mr5VJDGyqQ=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650376/abortion_econPanel_9.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/7FYEzv0DRN8gxLp6thMzz_ti2Bc=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650378/abortion_econPanel_10.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/hQ0i4QxNTsxKk3NHOavcEkV78yI=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650379/abortion_econPanel_11__1_.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/c3kznD4-JJFIbYbLdTNaGB19xzg=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650381/abortion_econPanel_12.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/GHpAOB2G7ckv1diqP9HvFA9ASz0=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650385/abortion_econPanel_13.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/sdqFCojwLfx9HEW6OF2hejqCc9g=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650386/abortion_econPanel_14__1_.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/OTf2Y6hVdkkLxPxsML_H2EJswQw=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650388/abortion_econPanel_15.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/6kIN-qpCOPgix5QqlF7OUpMnHF0=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650390/abortion_econPanel_16.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/E2WjRZEpoQfgxFqL8tWWAN_pAsU=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650392/abortion_econPanel_17.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/e27bQWKOlcgVoRUm-R8rPjjhWQk=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650393/abortion_econPanel_18.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/egOiT2JiBUv-CKlLXAxXn3FLumo=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650404/abortion_econPanel_19__1_.jpg"/>
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/rAOUXfq6zkRtSIJ6Rbgrihlyvpw=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23650405/abortion_econPanel_20.jpg"/>
</figure>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="L8kQ69">
<em>Aubrey Hirsch is a writer and illustrator in Berkeley, California. She most recently wrote about </em><a href="https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/23076305/breastfeeding-costs-baby-formula-shortage"><em>The many, many costs of breastfeeding</em></a><em> for</em> <em>The Highlight. </em>
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="6zFD8c">
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="4wFISt">
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="64eMxh">
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="hVFPtg">
</p></li>
<li><strong>The case against the Supreme Court of the United States</strong> -
<figure>
<img alt="Portrait Of Slave Dred Scott" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/A0sgYtJOc_uXZC92k-v7suJ3tis=/0x77:2645x2061/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/71015309/517215976.0.jpg"/>
<figcaption>
Dred Scott, whom the Supreme Court of the United States described as a being “of an inferior order.” | Getty Images
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
The Court was the midwife of Jim Crow, the right hand of union busters, the dead hand of the Confederacy, and now is one of the chief architects of America’s democratic decline.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="YyfTRx">
<em><strong>Editor’s note, June 25: </strong></em><em>The following is an updated version of an essay that originally ran in Vox in May. We are republishing it with revisions in light of the </em><a href="https://www.vox.com/2022/6/24/23181720/supreme-court-dobbs-jackson-womens-health-samuel-alito-roe-wade-abortion-marriage-contraception"><em>Supreme Court’s decision overruling </em>Roe v. Wade</a>.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="QE2plh">
Well, it’s done. Justice Samuel Alito has achieved a goal that he and his fellow Republicans have dreamed of for decades. <em>Roe v. Wade</em> is overruled. The constitutional right to an abortion no longer exists.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="1EiHih">
Alito’s decision in <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf"><em>Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization</em></a> may literally be the worst-kept secret in the Court’s history. An early draft of his opinion <a href="https://www.vox.com/2022/5/3/23054543/supreme-court-roe-wade-abortion-samuel-alito-overruled-draft-politico">leaked to Politico in early May</a>, something that has never happened in the Court’s modern history. And even if this leak had never occurred, the death of <em>Roe</em> <a href="https://www.vox.com/2022/6/24/23181720/supreme-court-dobbs-jackson-womens-health-samuel-alito-roe-wade-abortion-marriage-contraception">became inevitable</a> the minute Republicans gained a 6-3 supermajority on the Court.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="3896Y1">
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court’s public approval ratings are in free fall. A Gallup poll taken in June before the Court’s decision in <em>Dobbs</em> found that only 25 percent of respondents have “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in the Court, <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/394103/confidence-supreme-court-sinks-historic-low.aspx">a historic low</a>. And that’s after nearly a year’s worth of polls showing the Court’s approval in <a href="https://www.vox.com/23055620/supreme-court-legitimacy-crisis-abortion-roe">steady decline</a>.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ho3oQL">
To this<strong> </strong>I say, “good.” The <em>Dobbs</em> decision is the culmination of a decades-long effort by Republicans to capture the Supreme Court and use it, not just to undercut abortion rights but also to implement an unpopular agenda they <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/30/opinion/republican-party-supreme-court.html">cannot implement through the democratic process</a>.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="nhcOH7">
And the Court’s Republican majority hasn’t simply handed the Republican Party substantive policy victories. It is <a href="https://www.vox.com/22575435/voting-rights-supreme-court-john-roberts-shelby-county-constitution-brnovich-elena-kagan">systematically dismantling voting rights protections</a> that make it possible for every voter to have an equal voice, and for every political party to compete fairly for control of the United States government. Alito, the author of the opinion overturning <em>Roe</em>, is also the author of two <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-586_o7kq.pdf">important</a> <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-1257_g204.pdf">decisions</a> dismantling much of the Voting Rights Act.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="CKtkN4">
This behavior is consistent with the history of an institution that once blessed slavery and described Black people as “<a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/60/393/">beings of an inferior order</a>.” It is consistent with the Court’s history of <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3072585965506695672&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=6&amp;as_vis=1&amp;oi=scholarr">union-busting</a>, of <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/plessy_v_ferguson_(1896)">supporting racial segregation</a>, and of <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/323/214">upholding concentration camps</a>.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="eIjEtX">
Moreover, while the present Court is unusually conservative, the judiciary as an institution has an <a href="https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/38/keep-fearing-the-supreme-court/">inherent conservative bias</a>. Courts have a great deal of power to strike down programs created by elected officials, but little ability to build such programs from the ground up. Thus, when an anti-governmental political movement controls the judiciary, it will likely be able to exploit that control to great effect. But when a more left-leaning movement controls the courts, it is likely to find judicial power to be an ineffective tool.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="2klKw7">
The Court, in other words, simply does not deserve the reverence it still enjoys in much of American society, and especially from the legal profession. For nearly all of its history, it’s been a reactionary institution, a political one that serves the interests of the already powerful at the expense of the most vulnerable. And it currently appears to be reverting to that historic mean.
</p>
<h3 id="zAU0W9">
Alito wants abortion supporters to play a rigged game
</h3>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="yb6Gwc">
There have <a href="https://www.vox.com/2020/10/26/21534358/supreme-court-amy-coney-barrett-constitution-anti-democratic-electoral-college-senate">only been three justices in American history</a> who were appointed by a president who lost the popular vote, and who were confirmed by a bloc of senators who represent less than half the country. All three of them sit on the Supreme Court right now, and all three were appointed by Donald Trump.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="QSm2qx">
Indeed, if not for anti-democratic institutions such as the Senate and the Electoral College, it’s <a href="https://www.vox.com/2022/2/14/22925457/supreme-court-senate-confirmation-ketanji-brown-jackson-leondra-kruger-michelle-childs">likely that Democrats would control a majority of the seats</a> on the Supreme Court, and a decision overruling <em>Roe</em> would not be on the table.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="JYDOIm">
So it is ironic — for that reason, and others — that Alito’s opinion overruling <em>Roe</em> leans heavily on appeals to democracy. Quoting from an opinion by the late Justice Antonin Scalia, Alito writes that “the permissibility of abortion, and the limitations upon it, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf">are to be resolved like most important questions in our democracy</a>: by citizens trying to persuade one another and then voting.”
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="bP6Omr">
If Alito truly wants to put the question of whether pregnant individuals have a right to terminate that pregnancy up to a free and fair democratic process, polling indicates that liberals could probably win that fight on a national level.
</p>
<div id="M6pX49">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" dir="ltr" lang="en">
Nearly three in five Americans describe themselves as pro-choice. <br/><br/>By a 22-point margin, more Americans identify as pro-choice (58%) than pro-life (36%), including 3 in 4 Democrats (76%), a majority of Independents (56%) and more than 1 in 3 Republicans (37%). <a href="https://t.co/YqzzJ0Q4sQ">pic.twitter.com/YqzzJ0Q4sQ</a>
</p>
— Navigator Research (<span class="citation" data-cites="NavigatorSurvey">@NavigatorSurvey</span>) <a href="https://twitter.com/NavigatorSurvey/status/1518927874811744258?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 26, 2022</a>
</blockquote></div></li>
</ul>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="eUFWT5">
In fairness, polling on abortion often misses the nuances of public opinion. Many polls, for example, allow respondents to say that they believe that abortion should be legal “<a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx">under certain circumstances</a>” or in “<a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/">most cases</a>,” leaving anyone who reads those polls to speculate under which specific circumstances people think that abortion should be legal. But as Tresa Undem, co-founder of the public opinion research firm PerryUndem, <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23167397/abortion-public-opinion-polls-americans">told Vox’s Rani Molla</a>, “in all the work I’ve done — qualitative focus groups, in-depth interviews, surveys — the bottom line is that the public wants people making these decisions around abortion, not the government.”
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ExhyCa">
Perhaps the best evidence that proponents of legal abortion could win a fair political fight, however, is the Supreme Court’s own polling. After the Court allowed a strict anti-abortion law to take effect in Texas last fall, multiple polls found the Supreme Court’s approval rating at its <a href="https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/572471-supreme-court-job-approval-sinks-to-all-time-low-poll-shows/">lowest</a> <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/354908/approval-supreme-court-down-new-low.aspx">point</a> ever recorded. The recent <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/394103/confidence-supreme-court-sinks-historic-low.aspx">Gallup poll</a> finding only a small minority of the country has confidence in the Court suggests that public support for this partisan institution is continuing to erode.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="QdciYm">
But public opinion may not matter much in the coming political fight over abortion, because<strong> </strong>Alito and his fellow Republican justices have spent the past decade placing a thumb on the scales of democracy — making our system even less democratic than one that already features the Electoral College and a malapportioned Senate.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="G9w3oX">
Alito authored two opinions and joined a third that, when combined, <a href="https://www.vox.com/22575435/voting-rights-supreme-court-john-roberts-shelby-county-constitution-brnovich-elena-kagan">almost completely neutralize the Voting Rights Act</a>, the landmark legislation that took power away from Jim Crow and ensured that every American would be able to vote, regardless of their race.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Tee8q5">
Similarly, the Court’s Republican majority held in <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/18-422_9ol1.pdf"><em>Rucho v. Common Cause</em></a> (2019) that federal courts will do nothing to stop partisan gerrymandering. Alito is also one of the Court’s most outspoken proponents of the “<a href="https://www.vox.com/22958543/supreme-court-gerrymandering-redistricting-north-carolina-pennsylvania-moore-toth-amy-coney-barrett">independent state legislature doctrine</a>,” a doctrine that, in its strongest form, would give gerrymandered Republican legislatures nearly limitless power to determine how federal elections are conducted in their state — even if those gerrymandered legislatures violate their state constitution.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="EqVOfe">
One of the most troubling aspects of this Court’s jurisprudence is that it often seems to apply one set of rules to Democrats and a different, more permissive set of rules to Republicans. Last February, for example, Alito voted with four of his fellow Republicans to <a href="https://www.vox.com/2022/2/8/22922774/supreme-court-merrill-milligan-alabama-brett-kavanaugh-racial-gerrymandering-voting-rights-act">reinstate an Alabama congressional map</a> that a lower court determined to be an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="UHoOps">
In blocking the lower court’s order, Alito joined an opinion arguing that the lower court’s decision was wrong because it was <a href="https://www.vox.com/2022/2/8/22922774/supreme-court-merrill-milligan-alabama-brett-kavanaugh-racial-gerrymandering-voting-rights-act">handed down too close to the next election</a>.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ghKWxS">
But then, in late March, the Court enjoined Wisconsin’s state legislative maps, due to concerns that those maps <a href="https://www.vox.com/2022/3/23/22993107/supreme-court-wisconsin-race-gerrymander-voting-rights-act-legislature-elections-commission">may give too much political power to Black people</a>. March is, of course, closer to the next Election Day than February. So it is difficult to square the March decision with the approach Alito endorsed in February — though it is notable that the March decision by the Supreme Court benefited the Republican Party, while the previous decision was likely to benefit Democrats.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="mUxnmA">
I could list more examples of how this Court, often relying on novel legal reasoning, has advanced the Republican Party’s substantive agenda — on areas as diverse as <a href="https://www.vox.com/22889417/supreme-court-religious-liberty-christian-right-revolution-amy-coney-barrett">religion</a>, <a href="https://www.vox.com/22883639/supreme-court-vaccines-osha-cms-biden-mandate-nfib-labor-missouri">vaccination</a>, and the <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-107_ihdj.pdf">right of workers to organize</a>. But really, every issue pales in importance to the right to vote.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="5TPbIG">
If this right is not protected, then liberals are truly defenseless — even when they enjoy overwhelming majority support.
</p>
<h3 id="sIS3rO">
The Court’s current behavior is consistent with its history
</h3>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="QHu1SW">
In <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/5/137/"><em>Marbury v. Madison</em></a> (1803), the Supreme Court held that it has the power to strike down federal laws. But the actual issue at stake in <em>Marbury</em> — whether a single individual named to a low-ranking federal job was entitled to that appointment — was insignificant. And, after <em>Marbury</em>, the Court’s power to strike down federal laws <a href="https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/acts-of-congress-held-unconstitutional.html">lay dormant until the 1850s</a>.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="1Zdc0K">
Then came <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/60/393/"><em>Dred Scott v. Sandford</em></a> (1857), the pro-slavery decision describing Black people as “beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” <em>Dred Scott, </em>the Court’s very first opinion striking down a significant federal law, went after the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_Compromise">Missouri Compromise’s</a> provisions limiting the scope of slavery.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="BKdPRL">
It’s not surprising that an institution made up entirely of elite lawyers, who are immune from political accountability and cannot be fired, tends to protect people who are already powerful and cast a much more skeptical eye on people who are marginalized because of their race, gender, or class. <em>Dred Scott</em> is widely recognized as the worst decision in the Court’s history, but it began a nearly century-long trend of Supreme Court decisions preserving white supremacy and relegating workers into destitution — a <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Injustices-Comforting-Comfortable-Afflicting-Afflicted/dp/1568585691">history</a> that is glossed over in most American civics classes.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="mrjB8P">
The American people ratified three constitutional amendments — the 13th, 14th, and 15th — to eradicate <em>Dred Scott</em> and ensure that Black Americans would enjoy, in the 14th Amendment’s words, all of the “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv">privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States</a>.”
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="vK8sHM">
But then the Court spent the next three decades largely dismantling these three amendments.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="rqlkI8">
Just 10 years after the Civil War, the Supreme Court handed down <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/92/542"><em>United States v. Cruikshank</em></a> (1875), a decision favoring a white supremacist mob that armed itself with guns and cannons to kill a rival Black militia defending its right to self-governance. Black people, the Court held in <em>Cruikshank</em>, “must look to the States” to protect civil rights such as the right to peacefully assemble — a decision that should send a chill down the spine of anyone familiar with the history of the Jim Crow South.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="FGsHpr">
The culmination of this age of white supremacist jurisprudence was <a href="https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep163/usrep163537/usrep163537.pdf"><em>Plessy v. Ferguson</em></a> (1896), which blessed the idea of “separate but equal.”<strong> </strong><em>Plessy </em>remained good law for nearly six decades after it was decided.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="aqGPlP">
After decisions like <em>Plessy</em> effectively dismantled the Reconstruction Amendments’ promise of racial equality, the Court spent the next 40 years transforming the 14th Amendment into a bludgeon to be used against labor. This was the age of decisions like <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/198/45"><em>Lochner v. New York</em></a> (1905), which struck down a New York law preventing bakery owners from overworking their workers. It was also the age of decisions like <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/261/525/"><em>Adkins v. Children’s Hospital</em></a> (1923), which struck down minimum wage laws, and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3072585965506695672&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=6&amp;as_vis=1&amp;oi=scholarr"><em>Adair v. United States</em></a> (1908), which prohibited lawmakers from protecting the right to unionize.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="8jI4eX">
The logic of decisions like <em>Lochner</em> is that the 14th Amendment’s language providing that no state may “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv">without due process of law</a>” created a “right to contract.” And that this supposed right prohibited the government from invalidating exploitative labor contracts that forced workers to labor for long hours with little pay.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="d6KVQy">
As Alito notes in his <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf">opinion overruling <em>Roe</em></a>, the <em>Roe</em> opinion did rely on a similar methodology to <em>Lochner</em>. It found the right to an abortion to also be <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/410/113">implicit in the 14th Amendment’s due process clause</a>.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="wFt6fL">
For what it’s worth, I actually find this portion of Alito’s opinion persuasive. I’ve argued that the <em>Roe</em> opinion <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Injustices-Comforting-Comfortable-Afflicting-Afflicted/dp/1568585691">should have been rooted in the constitutional right to gender equality</a> — what the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg once described as the “opportunity women will have to participate as men’s full partners in the nation’s social, political, and economic life” — and not the extraordinarily vague and easily manipulated language of the due process clause.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="5KsrVG">
Indeed, one of the most striking things about the Court’s <em>Lochner-</em>era jurisprudence is how willing the justices were to manipulate legal doctrines — applying one doctrine in one case, then ignoring it when it was likely to benefit a party that they did not want to prevail.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="yiYTMC">
In <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/247/251/"><em>Hammer v. Dagenhart</em></a> (1918), for example, the Supreme Court struck down a federal law that prohibited goods produced by child labor from traveling across state lines. The reason Congress structured this ban on child labor in such an unusual way is because the Supreme Court had repeatedly held prior to <em>Dagenhart</em> that Congress could ban products from traveling in interstate commerce — among other things, the Court upheld a law prohibiting lottery tickets from traveling across state lines in <a href="https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/188/321.html"><em>Champion v. Ames</em></a> (1903).
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="oshrsu">
But the rule announced in <em>Champion</em> and similar cases was brushed aside once Congress decided to use its lawful authority to protect workers.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="6bxID1">
The Court also did not exactly cover itself in glory after President Franklin Roosevelt filled it with New Dealers who rejected decisions like <em>Lochner</em> and <em>Hammer</em>. One of the most significant Supreme Court decisions of the Roosevelt era, for example, was <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/323/214"><em>Korematsu v. United States</em></a> (1944), the decision holding that Japanese Americans could be forced into concentration camps during World War II,<strong> </strong>for the sin of having the wrong ancestors.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="M4L0Ab">
The point is that decisions like <em>Dobbs</em>, which commandeer the bodies of millions of Americans — or decisions dismantling the Voting Rights Act — are entirely consistent with the Court’s history as defender of traditional hierarchies. Alito is not an outlier in the Court’s history. He is quite representative of the justices who came before him.
</p>
<h3 id="RbslQY">
The judiciary is structurally biased in favor of conservatives
</h3>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="NYNwXl">
In offering this critique of the Supreme Court, I will acknowledge that the Court’s history has not been an unbroken string of reactionary decisions dashing the hopes of liberalism. The Court’s marriage equality decision in <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf"><em>Obergefell v. Hodges</em></a> (2015), for example, was a real victory for liberals.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Yj3uu0">
But the Court’s ability to spearhead progressive change that does not, like marriage equality, <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/350486/record-high-support-same-sex-marriage.aspx">enjoy broad popular support</a> is quite limited. The seminal work warning of the heavy constraints on the Court’s ability to effect such change is Gerald Rosenberg’s <a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/H/bo5828816.html"><em>The Hollow Hope</em></a>, which argues that “courts lack the tools to readily develop appropriate policies and implement decisions ordering significant social reform,” at least when those reforms aren’t also supported by elected officials.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Izxo2r">
This constraint on the judiciary’s ability to effect progressive change was most apparent in the aftermath of perhaps the Court’s most celebrated decision: <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/347/483/"><em>Brown v. Board of Education</em></a> (1954).
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="fcEZWZ">
<em>Brown </em>triggered <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/brown-v-board-education-didnt-end-segregation-big-government-did/">“massive resistance” from white supremacists</a>, especially in the Deep South. As Harvard legal historian Michael Klarman has documented, five years after <em>Brown</em>, only 40 of North Carolina’s 300,000 Black students attended an integrated school. Six years after <em>Brown</em>, only 42 of Nashville’s 12,000 Black students were integrated. A decade after <em>Brown</em>, only one in 85 African American students in the South attended an integrated school.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="SPfg6y">
The courts simply lacked the institutional capacity to implement a school desegregation decision that Southern states were determined to resist. Among other things, when a school district refused to integrate, the only way to obtain a court order mandating desegregation was for a Black family to file a lawsuit against it. But terrorist groups like the Ku Klux Klan used the very real threat of violence to ensure few lawsuits were filed.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="BFPhgB">
No one dared to file such a lawsuit seeking to integrate a Mississippi grade school, for example, <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/brown-v-board-education-didnt-end-segregation-big-government-did/">until 1963</a>.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="KCtHnh">
Much of the South did not really begin to integrate <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/brown-v-board-education-didnt-end-segregation-big-government-did/">until Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964</a>, which allowed the Justice Department to sue segregated schools, and which allowed federal officials to withhold funding from schools that refused to integrate. Within two years after this act became law, the number of Southern Black students attending integrated schools increased fivefold. By 1973, 90 percent of these students were desegregated.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="nQITyZ">
Rosenberg’s most depressing conclusion is that, while liberal judges are severely constrained in their ability to effect progressive change, reactionary judges have <a href="https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/38/keep-fearing-the-supreme-court/">tremendous ability to hold back such change</a>. “Studies of the role of the courts in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries,” Rosenberg writes, “ show that courts can effectively block significant social reform.”
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="XJDpY4">
And, while such reactionary decisions may eventually fall if there is a sustained political effort to overrule them, this process can take a very long time. <em>Dagenhart</em> was decided in 1918. The Court did not overrule it, and thus permit Congress to ban child labor, <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/312/100/">until 1941</a>.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ApQkdS">
There are <a href="https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/38/keep-fearing-the-supreme-court/">several structural reasons</a> courts are a stronger ally for conservative movements than they are for progressive ones. For starters, in most constitutional cases courts only have the power to strike down a law — that is, to destroy an edifice that the legislature has built. The Supreme Court could repeal Obamacare, but it couldn’t have created the Affordable Care Act’s complex array of government-run marketplaces, subsidies, and mandates.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="VI1nZo">
Litigation, in other words, is a far more potent tool in the hands of an anti-governmental movement than it is in the hands of one seeking to build a more robust regulatory and welfare state. It’s hard to cure poverty when your only tool is a bomb.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="0t9hwM">
So, to summarize my argument, the judiciary, for reasons laid out by Rosenberg and others, structurally favors conservatives. People who want to dismantle government programs can accomplish far more, when they control the courts, than people who want to build up those programs. And, as the Court’s history shows, when conservatives do control the Court, they use their power to devastating effect.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="olZtyx">
This alone is a reason for liberals, small-d democrats, large-D Democrats, and marginalized groups more broadly, to take a more critical eye to the courts. And the judiciary’s structural conservatism is augmented by the fact that, in the United States, institutions like the Electoral College and Senate malapportionment give Republicans a huge leg up in the battle for control of the judiciary.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="q51474">
Simply put, the Supreme Court has not served the American people well. It’s time to start treating it that way.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="S6T7rr">
</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>The end of Roe is only the beginning for Republicans</strong> -
<figure>
<img alt="A protester in a crowd carries a sign that reads, “Cancel the G.O.P.”" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/88c4o_MdkAeGGMKR53zNM4AgOBI=/449x0:7644x5396/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/71014174/1240670782.0.jpg"/>
<figcaption>
Demonstrators in Washington, DC, during a march for abortion rights in response to the Supreme Court’s draft opinion leaked in May, indicating the Court would overturn <em>Roe v. Wade</em>. | Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
The Supreme Court’s decision is already emboldening the anti-abortion movement to think bigger.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="1cgESc">
Republicans are celebrating the <a href="https://www.vox.com/2022/6/24/23181720/supreme-court-dobbs-jackson-womens-health-samuel-alito-roe-wade-abortion-marriage-contraception">Supreme Court’s decision to overturn <em>Roe v. Wade</em></a> as a win for the anti-abortion movement that was decades in the making.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="pWd0j7">
After a draft version of the opinion was <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473">leaked to Politico in May</a>, Republicans expressed optimism, but largely withheld expressions of triumph. They didn’t hold back on Friday, reveling in the immediate shift that began taking place after the decision, as red states invoked laws to further restrict abortion and as congressional Republicans began planning new anti-abortion policies.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="snr8Ye">
“What an historic day this is and what a great victory for life. And it’s not just a victory for life. It’s a victory for millions of people who have been part of this pro-life movement for decades, who have gone to state legislatures, who have gotten involved in the political process, who prayed … The decades of work [are] celebrated today,” House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) said during a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcYDXYm93hM">press conference</a> on Friday.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="MySA3Z">
For most Republicans, the decision presented an opportunity to tout their party’s ability to deliver on long-running campaign promises as they head into the midterms. But for Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) — who supported the confirmations of some of the conservative justices who joined the opinion based on the assumption that they wouldn’t overturn <em>Roe — </em>it was a moment of reckoning.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="5jNBys">
“This decision is inconsistent with what Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh said in their testimony and their meetings with me, where they both were insistent on the importance of supporting long-standing precedents that the country has relied upon,” Collins said in a <a href="https://www.collins.senate.gov/newsroom/senator-collins-statement-on-scotus-dobbs-decision">statement</a>.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="goxs6Q">
Most Republican lawmakers didn’t share Collins’s frustrations, and have made clear that the end of <em>Roe</em> is a launching pad for the anti-abortion movement, not an endgame. For months, they’ve been outlining a longer-term goal of imposing new restrictions on abortion nationally if they retake control of Congress.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="FPjAz3">
How far they actually go could be limited by public opinion: Gallup’s tracking poll has found <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23167397/abortion-public-opinion-polls-americans">85 percent</a> of voters think abortion should be legal in some or all circumstances. Former President Donald Trump reportedly <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/24/us/trump-roe-wade-republicans.html">predicted</a> that the decision could ultimately hurt Republicans politically, especially among suburban women who helped propel him into office in 2016.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="rkGGNf">
For now, however, those fears aren’t stopping red states and national Republicans.
</p>
<h3 id="fL1ISD">
Red states immediately started moving to further restrict abortion
</h3>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ImEXdl">
<a href="https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/abortion-policy-absence-roe">At least 13 states</a> have “trigger laws” that were designed to outlaw abortion after the Supreme Court overturned <em>Roe</em>. Some of them activated those laws in the immediate aftermath of the decision on Friday.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="204azZ">
Within minutes of the Supreme Court’s decision, Missouri’s Republican attorney general <a href="https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/attorney-general-governor-issue-opinions-outlawing-abortion-in-missouri/article_7aa1deaa-63a7-5b53-b45a-b89ecd733762.html">issued an opinion</a> that “triggers” <a href="https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-s-trigger-law-would-end-most-abortions-if-roe-struck-down/article_66f29069-e869-5565-b963-2a3cb9f34acf.html">parts of a 2019 law</a> to effectively end abortion in the state. That law bans abortion after eight weeks of pregnancy unless there is a critical medical reason, with no exceptions for rape, incest, or human trafficking. It also explicitly bans abortions for fetuses that might have Down syndrome and requires minors to notify their parents or guardians before getting an abortion in most cases.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="jFNRwO">
Texas has yet to trigger its own law, though that will likely <a href="https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/trending/article/texas-abortion-law-17263203.php">happen in about a month</a>. But Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton warned Friday that prosecutors could start seeking criminal charges against abortion providers immediately based on old state abortion bans that were enacted before <em>Roe</em> and that were never repealed by the legislature. The few remaining abortion providers and funds in the state consequently announced that they would be <a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2022/06/24/texas-clinics-abortions-whole-womans-health/?utm_source=Texas+Tribune+Newsletters&amp;utm_campaign=8faf41c35a-trib-newsletters-breaking-alert&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_term=0_d9a68d8efc-8faf41c35a-102627369&amp;mc_cid=8faf41c35a&amp;mc_eid=ce79b4cb9b">shutting down</a> for fear of legal repercussions.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="rw1tKm">
“Although these statutes were unenforceable while Roe was on the books, they are still Texas law,” <a href="https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/executive-management/Post-Roe%20Advisory%20(updated%20draft%2006.21.2022)%20(1).pdf?utm_content=&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_name=&amp;utm_source=govdelivery&amp;utm_term=">Paxton wrote</a>. “Under these pre-Roe statutes, abortion providers could be criminally liable for providing abortions starting today.”
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="dfdqKV">
Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, also announced Friday that he had enlisted state lawmakers to craft legislation that would ban most abortions after 15 to 20 weeks of pregnancy with exceptions for when the pregnant person’s life is endangered and in cases of rape and incest. He told the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/24/virginia-youngkin-abortion-15-week-ruling/?utm_campaign=wp_main&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_source=twitter">Washington Post</a> that his preference would be a 15-week cutoff, but that 20 weeks might be a feasible compromise in the split state legislature.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="r2Lz1J">
“The truth is, Virginians want fewer abortions, not more abortions. We can build a bipartisan consensus on protecting the life of unborn children, especially when they begin to feel pain in the womb, and importantly supporting mothers and families who choose life,” he <a href="https://www.governor.virginia.gov/newsroom/news-releases/2022/june/name-935442-en.html">said in a statement</a>.
</p>
<h3 id="4tTrGQ">
Republicans are already calling for a nationwide abortion ban
</h3>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="x6lvTt">
Republicans have also started to build a foundation to further restrict abortion access in the US, especially if they retake control of Congress.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="3WJ03W">
“Having been given this second chance for Life, we must not rest and must not relent until the sanctity of life is restored to the center of American law in every state in the land,” former Vice President Mike Pence <a href="https://twitter.com/Mike_Pence/status/1540337832505614337?s=20&amp;t=Esk3zfSiC8y28gEEthp2yw">tweeted</a> Friday.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="oZmtQB">
House Republican leaders — including Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, Republican Study Committee chair Jim Banks, and Judiciary ranking member Jim Jordan — are already lining up to support legislation that would impose a nationwide ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, <a href="https://twitter.com/MZanona/status/1540395033077157889?s=20&amp;t=5TwdnqydDQZ3_Gb8OEf91A">CNN reported</a>.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="MlxOsT">
That ban could pass the House if Republicans recapture the majority in this year’s midterm elections, as they are <a href="https://www.vox.com/22899204/midterm-elections-president-biden-thermostatic-opinion">widely expected to</a>, but it probably wouldn’t win support from a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, even if the GOP regains control of the chamber. It is possible that Republicans could choose to eliminate the filibuster to pass the ban, but so long as a Democrat remains in the White House, they would veto any such legislation.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="bwJZDi">
Republicans have also <a href="https://twitter.com/MZanona/status/1540395033077157889?s=20&amp;t=7BMx-IuA6f2aweZ4HugwCw">indicated</a> that they plan to reintroduce the “<a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/619/text">Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act</a>” if they recapture the House majority. That bill would put in place requirements for the care of infants born after failed, late-term abortions and could send doctors to prison if they fail to comply. Reproductive rights and physician groups have previously <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/2/25/18239964/born-alive-abortion-survivors-protection-2020-sasse">opposed</a> the legislation on the basis that it could criminalize doctors and is duplicative of existing laws that already support infants in these very rare cases.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="8CDiip">
And those plans appear to be only the beginning of their ambitions.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="43ClSM">
“In the days and weeks following this decision, we must work to continue to reject extreme policies that seek to allow late-term abortions and taxpayer dollars to fund these elective procedures,” McCarthy said in a <a href="https://www.republicanleader.gov/the-house-gop-leaderships-statement-on-the-dobbs-decision/">statement</a> Friday. “As we celebrate today’s decision, we recognize the decades of advocacy from the pro-life movement and we acknowledge much work remains to protect the most vulnerable among us.”
</p></li>
</ul>
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-the-hindu-sports">From The Hindu: Sports</h1>
<ul>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>SL women vs India women second T20 | Harmanpreet leads India to series sealing win over Sri Lanka</strong> - The third and final T20 will be played here on Monday.</p></li>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Ashwa Bravo, Pride’s Angel, Evaldo, Amreli, Inyouwebelieve, and Lagarde impress</strong> -</p></li>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>India grabs maiden compound mixed team gold in archery World Cup</strong> - Abhishek-Jyothi pair won its maiden World Cup gold in compound mixed team archery event</p></li>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Indian football | U-17 women's team suffers 1-3 loss to Chile</strong> - It was an improved performance against Chile for the Indian U-17 women’s team after a heavy defeat to Italy in the four-nation tournament</p></li>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Wayne Rooney resigns as Derby manager after 18 months in charge</strong> - The former Manchester United and England player joined the team in January 2020 as player-coach and ended that year in temporary charge</p></li>
</ul>
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-the-hindu-national-news">From The Hindu: National News</h1>
<ul>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Gujarat anti-terror team deatins activist Teesta Setalvad in Mumbai</strong> - An FIR has been lodged in Ahmedabad naming Ms. Setalvad and former police officers R.B. Sreekumar and Sanjiv Bhatt for allegedly forging documents related to 2002 Gujarat riots</p></li>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Andhra Pradesh registers 98 COVID-19 cases in 24 hours</strong> - It is the highest single-day tally in the last three months</p></li>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>State steps up inspection in restaurants</strong> - Aim to ensure service of quality food in outlets</p></li>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Administration to pass award for 84 acres at Gudatipally</strong> - Farmers reluctant to sign consent agreement</p></li>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Announce special package for Kittur, Kalyana Karnataka: Seer</strong> - Sri Basava Jaya Mrutyunjaya Swami, head of Lingayat Panchamasali Peetha, Kudalasangama, has said that as despite tall claims, North Karnataka region had remained backward, the state government should announce special economic package for the development of “Kalyana and Kittur Karnataka”.</p></li>
</ul>
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-bbc-europe">From BBC: Europe</h1>
<ul>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Norway shooting: Man charged with terrorism after deadly Oslo attack</strong> - Two were killed and 21 injured ahead of Oslo Pride, and police say it may have been a hate crime.</p></li>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Eighteen dead trying to cross into Spanish enclave of Melilla</strong> - A huge crowd of migrants storm a fence into Melilla in North Africa, with many killed and injured.</p></li>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Ukraine war: Kyiv orders forces to withdraw from Severodonetsk</strong> - Severodonetsk is the current focus of Russia as it tries to take control of eastern Ukraine.</p></li>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Italy’s Red Brigades: Ex-members face extradition from France</strong> - A French court will decide the fate of several ex-members of the violent Red Brigades guerrilla group.</p></li>
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Pompeii: Ancient pregnant tortoise surprises archaeologists</strong> - The reptile’s 2,000-year-old remains are discovered by archaeologists buried in volcanic ash and rock.</p></li>
</ul>
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-ars-technica">From Ars Technica</h1>
<ul>
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>New bacterium roughly the size, shape of an eyelash smashes size record</strong> - The discovery greatly expands the scope of known microbial diversity. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1862857">link</a></p></li>
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>LCD vs. LED vs. Mini LED vs. OLED: A quick guide</strong> - A brief breakdown of the display tech behind TVs, monitors, and laptops. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1861249">link</a></p></li>
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>PlayStation studios, major publishers break silence on abortion rights [Updated]</strong> - Ubisoft, Activision Blizzard, and more respond to Supreme Court decision. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1862832">link</a></p></li>
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Apple’s AR/VR headset will arrive in January 2023, analyst projects</strong> - Ming-Chi Kuo called it “the most complicated product Apple has ever designed.” - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1862802">link</a></p></li>
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>NASA’s Psyche mission launch on hold indefinitely pending reevaluation</strong> - The mission’s control software hasn’t been validated, and launch window is closing. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1862811">link</a></p></li>
</ul>
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-jokes-subreddit">From Jokes Subreddit</h1>
<ul>
<li><strong>Trump was asked his opinion on Roe VS Wade this morning.</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF -->
<div class="md">
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
His response?
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
“I don’t care how they get home, just get them outta the damn country!”
</p>
</div>
<!-- SC_ON -->
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/MakerOfRain21"> /u/MakerOfRain21 </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/vk3rys/trump_was_asked_his_opinion_on_roe_vs_wade_this/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/vk3rys/trump_was_asked_his_opinion_on_roe_vs_wade_this/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
<li><strong>I hate it when people use “you’re” and “your” incorrectly</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF -->
<div class="md">
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
There so dumb
</p>
</div>
<!-- SC_ON -->
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/MudakMudakov"> /u/MudakMudakov </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/vk5qr3/i_hate_it_when_people_use_youre_and_your/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/vk5qr3/i_hate_it_when_people_use_youre_and_your/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
<li><strong>An Arab man is wandering lost through the desert</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF -->
<div class="md">
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
An Arab man is wandering lost through the Sahara. He sees a man in the distance and struggles to get there hoping it’s not a mirage. He finally arrives and sees a nice Jewish man with a table of ties.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
“Please, I’ve been lost for hours and so incredibly thirsty, do you have any water?”. The Jewish guy looks at him and says, “no, why don’t you buy a tie?”
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
Arab man looks at him and says, “I don’t want a tie, I just need some water”.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
“Your shirt is all dirty; i think you’d look good in a new tie”.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
“For fuck sake! I don’t want a tie, please just give me some water!” says the Arab.
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
“Well I don’t have any water, but there’s a restaurant about 5 miles east that has plenty” says the Jew
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
A few hours later, the Jewish man is packing up his things to go home for the day and sees the Arab man again crawling back on his arms and knees. He approaches him and asks, “hey, were you able to find that restaurant?”
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
“Yeah, but your brother wouldn’t let me in without a fucking tie!”
</p>
</div>
<!-- SC_ON -->
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/dratelectasis"> /u/dratelectasis </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/vk1kys/an_arab_man_is_wandering_lost_through_the_desert/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/vk1kys/an_arab_man_is_wandering_lost_through_the_desert/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
<li><strong>Sex Therapy</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF -->
<div class="md">
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
Seems to be pretty old joke,
</p>
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
A couple, both age 78, went to a sex therapist’s office. The doctor asked, “What can I do for you?”<br/> The man said, “Will you watch us have sex?”<br/> The doctor looked puzzled, but agreed.<br/> When the couple finished, the doctor said, “There’s nothing wrong with the way you have sex,” and charged them $50.<br/> This happened several weeks in a row. The couple would make an appointment, have sex with no problems, pay the doctor, then leave.<br/> Finally, the doctor asked, “Just exactly what are you trying to find out?”<br/> “We’re not trying to find out anything,” the man replied. “She’s married and we can’t go to her house. I’m married and we can’t go to my house. The Holiday Inn charges $90. The Hilton charges $108. We do it here for $50…and I get $43 back from Medicare.”
</p>
</div>
<!-- SC_ON -->
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/omkar_mhase7266"> /u/omkar_mhase7266 </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/vjujhi/sex_therapy/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/vjujhi/sex_therapy/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
<li><strong>Can someone please tell me what the lowest rank in the military is?</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF -->
<div class="md">
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
Every time I ask someone, they say “It’s Private”.
</p>
</div>
<!-- SC_ON -->
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/PresidentJeek"> /u/PresidentJeek </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/vjmia4/can_someone_please_tell_me_what_the_lowest_rank/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/vjmia4/can_someone_please_tell_me_what_the_lowest_rank/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
</ul>
<script>AOS.init();</script></body></html>