A few final words on the Dobbs case, at least for now....

For those of you complaining that this was the first crack in the wall protecting abortion rights and that it never should have gotten this far, well, this is the first crack, you're right about that--in a sense.

But you have to keep in mind that Roe was not a piece of legislation.  It was a Supreme Court case we were told to consider to be law.  Now it's back in the hands of the states, where legal questions of life and death are supposed to be handled.

This is a good thing for you.  Now, it is a matter of legislation.  Now any laws that get passed will have a more sound basis than Roe did.  You'll lose some states, but you gain security in others.  And all your threats and promises to leave your reddish communities that voted for Trump or against abortion or whatever the hot topic was, will now be easier for you to consummate.

And for those of you who are demanding that SCOTUS be stripped of its "jurisdiction" to "rule over" abortion, let me enumerate a few of the ways in which that is stupid.

1. That's what the Dobbs case actually was about.  Did you not read the decision, or any of the actual-news articles about it?
2. What do you think would happen when someone wanted to file a lawsuit against a pro-life law, and SCOTUS wasn't allowed to hear it?
3. SCOTUS's powers might not be clearly defined on all sides--I'm just saying for the sake of the argument, not as a legal scholar--but what do you think would a precedent of "there are certain civil, humanitarian, legal, and moral matters the Supreme Court can't weigh in on" in the way you're proposing, do to our country when other people try to apply that logic to other topics?  What if someone challenged certain labor laws?  Proposed mandatory servitude for immigrants?  Moved to repeal the Nineteenth Amendment?  Moved to repeal the Nineteenth Amendment, with the stipulation that women thereby would exempt from all forms of taxation?  Sometimes convincing five justices instead of 51% of voters is an abuse of democracy--so don't talk to me about democratic crises--but it is also a necessary hedge against mob rule.
4. Maybe you're not as dumb as all this, but are playing to the crowd.  That's the name of the game, okay, but do the people who are gullible and ignorant enough to believe you, tend to show up at the polls?