The relentless need to oppress

This is one of those times where I’m tired of the relentless push by supremacists to make the lives others miserable. It seems all they do is defend their supposed position at the top of the hierarchy. We get bombarded by something – several somethings – every day. As I put in the title of my previous post it’s like debating a hailstorm. A supremacist is anyone (and some days that includes me) who tries to oppress (bully, belittle, harm – lots of words go here) someone else. A common way an oppressor acts is to do some sort of oppression (such as bully another) and see what the reaction is. Do their friends cheer them on? Do authority figures call them out? They weigh the consequences. If the cheering outweighs the punishment they do it again and do something stronger. That discussion doesn’t include the person who does a bit of bullying, develops and empathy for the victim and understanding of what they did, and stops. Though I’ve been thinking about supremacy and oppression for several years now I still look back at recent actions and realize what I did was (hopefully in a minor way) assert my superiority and caused (hopefully mild) oppression. Some people manage this understanding. Many do not. We’re in a time when too many people in too many high public places cheer oppression or at least stay quiet about it. The crimes of the nasty guy (well before he got to Washington) were ignored, as were the crimes of people like Jeffrey Epstein. Both kept oppressing and criming. We used to be in a time when a white supremacist didn’t talk about his supremacy in public because the shame heaped upon him. They knew their views were not welcome in polite society. Just a few years ago women began a strong effort to speak out against their abusers. But a candidate for president cheered the supremacists. And they became bolder. Republicans used to vote for renewals of the Voting Rights Act. Then five people on the Supreme Court said they could show their inner racist. Republican oppressive behavior was cheered by their base. What once brought enough shame to prevent oppressive behavior, or at least keep it hidden is now praised. Yes, I know a great deal of oppression has been a strong component of our national culture for several centuries. I’m tired of it. I’m tired of the onslaught. I’m tired of those who claim they’re high in the hierarchy seeming to spend all their effort in every day in oppressing those they believe should be below them. The won’t let up until someone – which is we the people – makes them stop. Right now there is little evidence of that happening soon. So on to the latest round of oppression. April Siese of Daily Kos reported that Politico obtained a leaked draft of the pending ruling in an abortion case before the Supreme Court. Of course, leaks from the Supremes are extremely rare (some news outlets say it is unprecedented, others say the Roe v. Wade ruling was leaked). The draft was written by Alito and concurred by Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barret (notably Roberts isn’t in the list). It says that Roe v. Wade was “egregiously wrong from the start” and there is no right to an abortion. This morning NPR noted this is a draft and doesn’t (yet) have any legal meaning. But it is highly unlikely that the final ruling will be different enough to leave the right to an abortion in place. Siese quoted a few tweets to add a bit more. From Mark Joseph Stern (link to his full discussion):

Alito's draft opinion explicitly criticizes Lawrence v. Texas (legalizing sodomy) and Obergefell v. Hodges (legalizing same-sex marriage). He says that, like abortion, these decisions protect phony rights that are not "deeply rooted in history."

Jay O’Brien mentioned that 13 states have trigger laws that automatically go into effect if the Supremes overturn Roe. There are also laws in many other states that were unenforceable under Roe that come back to life with it gone. Steve Kenson added:

Requiring civil rights to be “deeply rooted in history” is a great way to say “if you didn’t always have civil rights, then you should never have them.”

Laura Clawson of Kos reported on the leak and what is says. She added what Schumer and Pelosi said in condemnation of what the draft proposes. Then she wrote:

What Pelosi and Schumer didn’t say is what they plan to do about it. Or even what they plan to say Democrats would do about it if they had a few more Senate seats.

A lot of the Republican talk is that the states get to decide whether abortion is legal or not. They know many states will enact or have already enacted laws to ban abortion as soon as the ruling is official. They also know many states are working to declare women have a right to an abortion. Joan McCarter of Kos wrote of what the Republicans are not saying very loud – if they regain control of Congress and the presidency they will be ready to enact a strict national ban. Various organizations are working to make sure future GOP prez. candidates are onboard. Wrote McCarter:

Because of course it isn’t about states’ rights when it comes to abortion. It’s not about anyone’s rights.

So we have to elect more pro-choice candidates. Right?

The response from Democrats has been underwhelming. There’s been little more than the usual platitudes from Democratic leadership about protecting the right to choose and absolutely no endorsement, or really even any talk, about the most important thing they could do right now to ensure that right: expand the courts. Expand the district courts, the circuit courts and especially the Supreme Court to stop the radical right from imposing a right-wing evangelical dominionist hellscape across the land. And while that’s not possible right now with an evenly divided Senate, run on it and work like hell to get a big enough majority in the Senate to make Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema irrelevant, get rid of the filibuster, and save the country. ... Don’t tell us you’re going to fight like hell. Do it.

From the end of a thread by Michael Harriot:

GOP: Then we’ll steal a SCOTUS seat & fill it with a handmaiden whose entire life goal is overturning Roe. Dems: Still not gonna fight or pack the court. Or end the filibuster. After all, the law says… SCOTUS: We find that the law of the land doesn’t matter. Roe is overturned. Dems: I can’t even believe they did that! Someone needs to stop them!

Elie Mystal, a justice correspondent, tweeted:

PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN SHOULD PROMISE TO SEND DOCTORS TO PROVIDE ABORTION SERVICES ON FEDERAL PROPERTY. 1. The doctors don't need to be licensed in the states because A: They're practicing on federal property and B: According to the Supreme Court, abortion isn't health care. 2. The doctors should volunteer which gets us around the Hyde Amendment.

Then Mystal linked to an article he wrote last September, when Texas passed its restrictive ban, about all the things the federal government could be doing and isn’t. That makes one wonder if the big pots of money that bought off Republicans has also bought off Democrats. The means the difference between the two parties is the Democrats pretend to be on our side. Jennifer Mendelsohn tweeted four images of death certificates of women who died of an abortion. The dates are 1884 to 1927. In the cause of death several use the phrase “Criminal Abortion.” I saw a tweet that Twitter dangled as something enticing to click on, but it disappeared before I had a chance to do so. So I can’t give credit. I’m sure the text isn’t quoted accurately and I’m sure there is more to the thread.

If conservatives really cared about the children they are forcing women to give birth to, the medical costs of giving birth would be free and there would be generous paid maternity and paternity leave.

And there would be basic income so the kids were properly fed. And education would be free ... Some Republicans are irate. Not about the text of the draft ruling, but that it was leaked. Hunter of Kos reported Sen. Josh Hawley, one of those who most ardently supported the Capitol attack, called the leak a “coordinated assault by the Left.” Sen. Ron Johnson said the goal of the leak by the radical left was to “intimidate sitting Supreme Court justices.” Moscow Mitch – the guy who broke the court – also blamed the radical left. Aaron Rupar tweeted that Fox mentioned the leak more than they mentioned abortion. Hunter included a tweet by Tina Smith that includes a photo of the Capiol attack to remind us what an actual “coordinated assault” looks like. Hunter reminded us we don’t know who leaked the opinion. It could have been a conservative wanting to blame a liberal. Or ...

if conservative justices were feeling uneasy about the sheer magnitude of what Alito intends to unravel, leaking the document would paint a target on whichever conservative justices were threatening to back out.

Rebekah Sager of Kos reported that Chief Justice Roberts condemned the leak as an egregious breach of trust. He has asked the Marshal of the Court to investigate. Sager quoted Amy Kapczynski tweets about the timing of the leak. This draft was circulated back in February. Why would a liberal leak it in May when the opinion is released in June? That puts the focus on the leak and not the opinion. Sager wrote:

Essentially, Kapczynski says leaks are a well-sharpened tool conservatives use to show they’re bold enough to break the rules and public trust to get what they want… and then blame the left. But, in the end, the leak isn’t the story. The opinion is.

Draft majority opinions circulate through the Supremes first. Then concurrences followed by dissents. And this is the right time for concurrences to start their rounds. Perhaps the leak is because Roberts circulated a concurrence urging a more moderate position, perhaps one keeping exceptions for the life of the mother. Seise posted a long string of photos and videos of protests that were held across the country yesterday. Lauren Sue of Kos reported that the hashtag #ShoutYourAbortion is now quite active. There is also a website where one can tell their story anonymously. And women are telling their powerful stories. A few examples of what they said in quoted tweets and in this post’s comments: A woman said an abortion allowed her to safely leave an abusive relationship. Warren Senders said an abortion saved his mother’s life and he was born three years later. conniptionfit said her mother not having an abortion meant dropping out of college and married an abusive man. TB50 said their mother was raped and they spent a few years in foster care before being adopted by a woman who was abusive. The people who demand pregnancies be carried to term and promote adoption did not check on them. Kerry Eleveld of Kos listed some of the other progressive things that appear to be on Alito’s and conservative’s list of things to overturn: The right to same-sex marriage. The right of same-sex couples to be intimate (which was illegal in some places up to 2003). The right to access contraception. The right to interracial marriage. McCarter wrote:

“Pro-choice Republican” senators Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins would have you believe that they didn’t see the immediate end of abortion rights coming. That they had absolutely no clue the Trump justices they were trading votes on (both voted yes on Gorsuch; Murkowski was “present” on Kavanaugh, yes on Barrett; Collins was yes on Kavanaugh, no on Barrett) would do something so radical. Never mind that the guy who nominated them promised as a Republican hopeful that the best way to end abortion in the U.S. was “by electing me president.” ... Nonetheless, both Collins and Murkowski are playing disingenuous today, following the leak of Alito’s draft opinion in the Mississippi case that will end national abortion rights. Collins released a statement expressing her total surprise. “If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office,” Collins said.

McCarter quoted a tweet from Demand Justice:

Five Republican Supreme Court justices have reportedly voted to overturn Roe v. Wade. But when they were testifying at their Senate confirmation hearings, they all denied they were planning to do that.

And McCarter concluded:

Which takes us back to this: the Supreme Court as it stands is illegitimate. It is full of liars, people who lied to the Senate under oath. Not to mention insurrectionists. It needs to be dealt with. It needs to be expanded. And Collins and Murkowski either need to wake up to reality, or stop lying to their constituents.

Michael Beschloss, presidential historian, tweeted:

What does it mean for rule of law in America if nominees to the Supreme Court feel free to say things that they may not actually believe during public confirmation hearings and to Senators in private as a tactic to get confirmed?

Greg Dworkin, in a pundit roundup for Kos, had some interesting quotes. First from Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post:

With polls showing as much as 70 percent of Americans favoring the preservation of Roe v. Wade, unelected justices — in some cases appointed by presidents who lacked a popular-vote majority and confirmed by senators who did not represent a majority of the country — would bring to head a battle between a fading racial, religious and political minority and an increasingly diverse, secular country.

Dworkin quoted Dr. Mia Brett

Things not “deeply rooted” in US history - Interracial marriage - Anyone other than white men voting - The concept of illegal immigration (doesn’t exist until 1875) - Non White people naturalizing - An individual right to a handgun - Women serving on juries

Dworkin also quoted an article in Axios about what Republican candidates for the Senate should be saying about abortion: * Say Americans are compassionate people who want to welcome every new baby into the world. * Say Democrats have radical and extreme views on abortion, outside the American mainstream. * Refute the Democrat claims – say that Republicans do not want to take away contraception, mammograms, and female healthcare or throw doctors and women in jail. My refutation of those three points. * Democrats are also compassionate towards women who find themselves in difficult circumstances for which abortion needs to be an option. * Democrat’s views are actually well within the mainstream. See above on 70% wanting to preserve Roe. * Yes, they do want to take away contraception as the GOP candidate for Michigan Attorney General has said. They may not want to throw doctors and women in jail but they have already instituted hefty fines. And that bit about mammograms is scare tactics. Bill in Portland, Maine, in his Cheers and Jeers column for Kos, quoted from Molly Ivens’ book Who Let the Dogs In?

[A]pproximately one fourth of all fertilized eggs are swept out on the menstrual tide before they even get near to implanting themselves in the uterine wall, and we do not hold funerals over Kotex or Tampax. I suggest to you this means that the beginning of life is not a single specific event, but rather a process that deserves increasing respect as it continues toward birth—precisely the tripartite system set up under Roe v. Wade (and if you hear Roe v. Wade described as "abortion on demand," you are listening to a liar). I respect those who oppose abortion, but I do not think they have a right to use the law as an instrument of coercion against people who do not believe (and it is a matter of faith) as they do. ... There were an estimated one million abortions a year in this country before Roe. Abortion can be safe and legal, or dirty and illegal. It cannot be stopped.

Of course, I’m getting a lot of emails from organizations working towards reproductive rights or progressive causes asking for donations. That was the hot topic in the news (it even threw the Ukraine war off the top of the national conversation). But it isn’t the only one I’m grumbling about today. If I had more time to write today (he says at the end of a six page post) I would have also written about: Election tampering. Oppressing LGBTQ people. Claiming the refugees coming across the Mexican border are an “invasion.” People demanding others take off their masks. A politician saying banned books should be burned and the state book should be the Bible. I’ll get to those eventually.