Roe v Wade isn't going anywhere, cause then we'd get Smith v Jones

Remember, its about PRIVACY, not ABORTION.

Outlaw abortions? OK.

How do you know the woman is pregnant? Oops, Constitutional Right to Privacy, sorry, not telling you.
How do you know the woman got an abortion? Oops, Constitutional Right to Privacy, sorry, not telling you.
Ask doctor? Oops, Constitutional Right to Privacy, sorry, not telling you.

Point is, a woman walks into a doctors office, walks out 1 hour later.
There is no possible way to find out what happened inside.
Doctor and woman are protected by the Constitution.
With or without Roe v Wade.

Violate that protection, and you get a brand new Roe v Wade, aka Smith v Jones (or whoever).

that the RW MUST get rid of Griswold where the right to sexual privacy was found. I'm sure they are plotting that strategy even as we speak.

is that is exactly the angle they are attacking it from. theye are saying you DON'T have a right to privacy. afteer they've eliminated that right, all your points are moot.

Or maybe i am misunderstanding what you are getting at.

I've always thought that in order to overturn Roe, you have to do so on privacy, you have to tell Americans that they have no right to privacy when it comes to healthcare. Since Roe, we have seen more laws boosting a person's right to privacy re healthcare, such as hippa, so I think that the implications are that roe is stronger now than ever. (not to mention that something like 65% of people support legal abortion, probably the highest number in our history). A failed challenge to Roe will only solidify this. Also, it's being challenged by a state passing a stupid law for no new reason. There's no new case, no new evidence, nothing to add to the discussion that might overturn Roe, it'll just be a rehash of the same old stuff which should lead the court to the same old decision.

I'm not a lawyer, but that is my gut feeling on the subject. I hope I'm right, anyway.

that the last thing the GOP power structure actually *wants* is an end to abortion in the U.S.

It's almost the only thing they have that will bring the hair-palmed, knuckle-walking, mouth-breathing fundamentalist roach-people out of the churches and into the voting booths.

Outlawing abortion would mean the collapse of a billion-dollar right-wing industry, another thing the GOP can't countenance.

The practical effect of overturning Roe would be to send the issue back to the several states. We need to understand this fact.

If there is a greater, overarching strategy, it is to chip away at Griswold v. Connecticut and the establishment of the doctrine of a "right to privacy," which IMHO, once existed in the 4th Amendment anyway.

The anti-abortion tools of the GOP should be ignored, instead of us legitimizing them by entering into debate with them.

If so, shouldn't all drug taking be legal too, as long as it's done in private? I'd have though a constitutional challenge to drug laws would have been launched and succeeded, in that case.

to make the concept even worthwhile. Though I understand the merits of what you posted above and think it's a different way of looking at it, in order for it to mean a damn thing you would have to have enough doctors willing to jeopardize their families and careers and risk prison. If they weren't willing to put their entire lives on the line in order to continue giving abortions, than the whole privacy point is moot anyway.

Another unintended consequence of forcing unwanted pregnancies to birth. Paternity is easier to determine now, and I suspect that a lot of Republican men who are anti-choice have not really thought this through ( a common affliction).