On the surface, the Court’s decision to hear a major abortion case, and its decision not to apply one of its criminal justice precedents retroactively, may appear to have little in common. Sign up to receive our newsletter each Friday. Vox’s German Lopez is here to guide you through the Biden administration’s burst of policymaking. Vannoy that Ramos is not retroactive - meaning that nearly all people convicted by non-unanimous jury verdicts before Ramos was decided will not benefit from the Ramos decision. On Monday, the Supreme Court held in Edwards v. Louisiana, the Supreme Court held that no one could be convicted of a “serious crime” unless a jury voted unanimously to convict them. The second action involved a more obscure case. Wade, which are beloved by liberals and loathed by conservatives. Dobbs is potentially an existential threat to the constitutional right to an abortion, and it tees up the question of whether this Court is willing to overrule venerable decisions like Roe v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a challenge to a Mississippi law banning nearly all abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The first was the Court’s announcement that it will hear Dobbs v. The Supreme Court took two actions on Monday that hint that many Democrats’ worst fears about the Court’s 6-3 Republican majority might come true.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |