Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Pinkbell

The Dread-Scott case was precedent at the SCOTUS for many more years than has been Roe V Wade. In neither case does precedent mean that a precedent cannot, rightfully even, be challenged by the SCOTUS.


5 posted on 03/21/2017 8:49:52 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Wuli

Or challenged by Congress.

if they only had a spine.


48 posted on 03/21/2017 9:48:26 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Wuli

Slavery was a super precedent.

Women not voting was a super precedent.

Bibles and God in public schools was a super precedent here, 180 years even before the usa.

But the liberals fought to destroy them. If its a precedent they dont like it doesnt matter.

Liberal and progressive are strong synonyms for hypocrite.


52 posted on 03/21/2017 10:14:00 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man ( Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Wuli

Well, not really.

Scott versus Sanford decision: March 6, 1857

US Civil War: 1861-1865

13 Amendment (making slavery illegal): December 6, 1865

8 & 1/2 years (of Scott versus Sanford)

Roe versus Wade: January 22, 1973

44 years and counting. Meanwhile, millions of dead babies. Far more dead babies than all the slaves plus all the deaths in the Civil War combined.


71 posted on 03/22/2017 4:06:09 AM PDT by Alas Babylon! (Keep fighting the Left and their Fake News!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson