It's UNCONSTIUTIONAL!

and goes to the Supreme Court in the hope it will reverse itself and overturn Roe v. Wade.

with an anti-choice majority. do you think they can overcome stare decisus?

Lower courts are obliged to follow precedents established by a higher court, but the Supreme Court, being the highest court, is not required to follow its own prior decisions but may reverse itself if it so chooses. Most of the time it doesn't because it recognizes the need for stability in the law. But it has happened many times, usually because the court decides either that a previous case was wrongly decided, or because circumstances have substantially changed such that the rule established by a previous case should no longer apply. A number of very famous cases expressly overruled previous decisions (a list is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions) For example, in the loathsome Citizens United case the court overruled its own decision in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, decided in 1990.

So there's no guarantee that the current court would uphold Roe v. Wade if another abortion case is appealed and the court chooses to hear it.

overturn Roe. They have to consider the effect on the whole of our society in the U.S. if this happens. The women's movement is burgeoning, not shrinking. SCOTUS, of any of our 3 part section of government must make a pretty heavy decision. Do they really want to have riots in our streets?

What do you think will be the reason for a decision to reconsider Roe?

which is what happened in Citizens United, but they did it anyhow. Austin addressed the question of corruption or the appearance of corruption as the result of unrestricted campaign contributions, but the CU court said that the government shouldn't have to decide whether large expenditures distorted an audience's perceptions, and that the type of "corruption" that might justify government controls on spending for speech had to relate to some form of "quid pro quo" transaction. Obviously that's bullshit.

The Supreme Court is quite capable of making disingenuous arguments to arrive at a result it wants. Bush v. Gore is a perfect example of that.

If they have to kill a few in back alleys, so be it.

Cuz you know, emails.

They just want to control and repress young girls and women. Nope. Not acceptable.

Everybody knows that

We have a million plus loyal Democrats in this state who are quite intelligent and human.

There were two teachers, one physician, one engineer, one web designer and a photographer.

Not exactly idiots.