this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
-24 points (30.6% liked)

Conservative

251 readers
9 users here now

We are a community dedicated to discussion surrounding the political right.

People of all political views are welcome here, but we expect a high level of discussion from everyone.

Rules:
-Good Faith participation only. take hollow shit slinging elsewhere please
-Stay on topic. should be obvious
-Follow instance rules. They pay the bills, they get to set rules.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Estiar -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I mostly agree, though I'd like to point out that the Dobbs decision was overturning this trend. Roe v. Wade was a case very much creating legislation where there was none. It didn't have very good justification, but now with Dobbs, we have the opportunity to codify what we actually want in our law today. That was written in the Dobbs opinion IIRC. Nevada seems safe for those wishing to preserve abortion at the moment, but the Judge here is making things much more complicated than they ought to be.

(I really hate the citizens united case. The conservatives may have passed it, but the only thing it conserves are the elites)

[–] BottomTierJannie 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

but the Judge here is making things much more complicated than they ought to be.

How so? Is it not reasonable to enforce that ballot measures must be specific and not just a ton of stuff all bundled into a big all-or-nothing vote?

[–] Estiar -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What's illegal is different from what's reasonable. I'm going to have to find the judge's opinion, but the article doesn't really give any reasons why it's illegal.

Congress passes all sorts of these big bundles of law all the time

[–] BottomTierJannie 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You seriously see no problem with just putting massive bundles of issues on a purely binary yes/no vote with no room for anything to be changed or removed?

[–] Estiar -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Then vote it down

Actually, now that I read the damn article again, it seems like there's a single subject rule in Nevada. That's the crux of the issue.

[–] BottomTierJannie 2 points 1 year ago

Yes. That was the entire point. What have you been talking about this whole time

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

At the same time it could be said that Roe was preventing the creation of legislation where there should be none. While rights like privacy and bodily autonomy are not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution, they are woven throughout the Constitution and firmly established in the Federalist papers and other foundational documents.