Women's Rights & Issues

Budi

(15,325 posts) Sat May 21, 2022, 02:08 PM May 2022

Sherrilyn Ifill. Book on abortion & disenfranchised voters. "Stealing the Crown Jewels"

Link to tweet

"Stealing the Crown Jewels". Sherrilyn Ifill
Justice Alito purports to place the future of abortion in the hands of women voters—despite abetting the disenfranchisement of Black and Latina women.
May 12, 2022

From: The New York Review https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2022/05/12/stealing-the-crown-jewels-ifill-roe/
How Alito's decision means voter disenfranchisment leaves Black & minority women out of abortion rights at the ballot box..
~This is a very important read.

This certainaly applies to every State now actively gerrymandering minority districts.

And especially the GOP/CarnegieMellon abetted changes to voting Districts of NY, useful in the nearing future for pushing thru R policies on women's issues.

Pay attention. There's a glaring reason why they want to supress the voting rights of minority women.

yesterday:
AS FOR CARNEGIE MELLON & CERVAS

Link to tweet

..the growing civil rights disaster in New York - brought on by a single rogue judge and his Carnegie Mellon advisor? Disenfranchisement attached to the university's name.

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Sherrilyn Ifill. Book on abortion & disenfranchised voters. "Stealing the Crown Jewels" (Original Post) Budi May 2022 OP

The idea that striking down Roe will put abortion in the hands of "women voters" is utter b.s. ShazzieB May 2022 #1

Another fine example: Budi May 2022 #2

Oh. My. God. ShazzieB May 2022 #3

ShazzieB

(18,559 posts)

1. The idea that striking down Roe will put abortion in the hands of "women voters" is utter b.s.

Reply to Budi (Original post)

Sat May 21, 2022, 03:54 PM

May 2022

Near the end of his draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, however, Justice Samuel Alito gives a cynically upbeat prediction about its potential effects. Rather than forthrightly address the suffering the Court’s decision would cause, he casts it as a benevolent grant to women voters in individual states—one that would “return the issue of abortion to legislative bodies” and allow “women on both sides of the abortion issue to seek to affect the legislative process.” For emphasis, he reminds us that “women are not without electoral or political power.”

The entire opinion is of course full of b.s., but the pretense of doing women some kind of favor may be the single largest piece of bull shittery in the whole thing. What he says in the penultimate paragraph is much closer to the truth (bolding added by me):

The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each state from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey abrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected representatives.

"The people and their elected representatives" is a large and amorphous body, of which "women voters" are only one subset. Alito knows damn good and well that they are not the same thing, and he is absolutely FINE with that. The level of disingenuousness here is absolutely staggering. I can't think of a better response than this: