Supreme Court Justice Barrett Tips Hat to Bodily Autonomy in Vaccine Mandate Debate

Breitbart: Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett on Wednesday nodded to the argument that abortion laws could be an “infringement on bodily autonomy” before saying such issues exist in “other contexts like vaccines.”

The justice, who was nominated by former President Donald Trump and leans conservative in her decision making, made the remark during oral arguments in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case. The case, which is centered on Mississippi’s law banning abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, is the biggest challenge to Roe v. Wade in decades — a 1973 decision that declared abortion a constitutional right, despite it being mentioned nowhere in the text of the U.S. Constitution.

Barrett was asking the the Senior Director of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Julie Rikelman, about the implication Safe Haven laws could have on abortion law, specifically questioning whether the current law gives equal burden to both parenthood and pregnancy. Safe Haven laws are designed to prevent the abandonment of newborns and allow parents to leave newborns at any Safe Haven facility recognized by state law. The child then becomes a ward of the state. The exact parameters vary from state to state, though all 50 states have Safe Haven laws. more

17 Comments on Supreme Court Justice Barrett Tips Hat to Bodily Autonomy in Vaccine Mandate Debate

  1. Sorry if I don’t hold my breath waiting for the corporate government to rule on the business of mechanized death.

    16
  2. No worries.

    Roberts will just yell at her again and she’ll be right back on the Dem side just like with the “election”.

    Failing that, she could get a free trip to a dude ranch complete with an “Alito Pillow” if she insists on talking off the baby-sacrifice narrative…

    14
  3. “Sorry if I don’t hold my breath waiting for the corporate government to rule on the business of mechanized death.” -Mohammed’s pink swastika

    And sorry if I no longer care about our ‘government’ that is no longer one of laws and not of men.

    8
  4. She’s not trustworthy, but Barrett’s obvious disdain for abortion could be a good reason that will make her rule against Roe vs. Wade. She may stand her ground even if Roberts pressures her to do the opposite.

    6
  5. Abortion is different because a vaccine decision is just for, possibly, putting oneself at greater risk for catching a specific virus. An abortion is choosing to kill someone else with absolute certainty, and usually not for health reasons other than being too fucking undisciplined to avoid pregnancy.

    11
  6. They are not going to strike down Roe vs. Wade. Not enough originalists, or true Conservatives on SCOTUS. Clarence Thomas is the only true Conservative there. One could argue that Samuel Alito is close enough, but still not enough Conservatives on SCOTUS. The rest are either RINOs or fake Conservatives.

    5
  7. Clarence Thomas is right.
    Abortion is immoral and a crime against humanity.
    Killing one child kills off every baby that person may have raised, and the children those people may have raised. You didnt just kill one, you killed off entire generations.

    7
  8. “My body my choice” unless it’s a mandatory vaccine that the left likes, right? Then the gubmint can do anything they want.

    7
  9. Gone are the days of politicians kissing babies to get elected. Now they just want to kill them – and us.

    3
  10. In England, if you hit a sheep with your car and kill it, you are responsible. Even if the sheep runs out in front of your car, you are responsible for paying the owner for the sheep killed and for the next several generations that sheep would have produced. Unborn human children aren’t valued as much as sheep are. God is not amused.

    2

Comments are closed.