The conservative Supreme Court,
which of course includes three
Supreme Court justices who
were nominated and confirmed during
the Trump administration,
decided against blocking Texas's
anti abortion law.
Which effectively bans abortions
past six weeks and
encourages private citizens across
the country to essentially report
on anyone who might be aiding and
abetting a woman seeking to
have an abortion past six weeks.
Now, this doesn't mean that
the Supreme Court has weighed in on
the constitutionality of this law,
which just went into effect on
September 1st in the state of
Texas.
However, it does mean that as
this case makes its way through
the lower courts,
there is abortions are illegal.
Essentially 85% of abortions in
the state of Texas happen
past the six week mark.
And so you have abortion providers
in the state that have canceled
appointments, they're being
incredibly cautious because they're
terrified of these lawsuits being
brought against them from private
citizens across the country.
And so we're in a terrible
situation because not only is this
impacting women in the state of
Texas, this will impact women
across the country,
particularly in red states.
And these efforts are now being
duplicated in places like Florida,
which we'll get
to later in the show.
But let's give you the details
of how the Supreme Court decided to
weigh in on this and
how they refused to block it.
The Supreme Court's vote was 5 to
4 with Chief Justice John Roberts
joining the Court's three liberal
members in dissent.
So just consider the fact that
the conservative Supreme Court
justices that were confirmed during
Trump's administration not only
have an impact on the reproductive
freedoms of women.
But they will have an impact on all
sorts of legislation that will be
challenged by conservatives for
the rest of our lifetimes.
Just keeping it real, that's what
the reality of the situation is.
The majority opinion was unsigned
and consisted
of a single long paragraph.
It said the abortion providers who
had challenged the law in
an emergency application to
the court, had not made their
case in the face of complex and
novel procedural questions.
The majority stress that it was not
ruling on the constitutionality of
the Texas law and
did not mean to limit procedurally
proper challenges to it.
So again, this is essentially
the conservative Supreme Court
justices saying we refuse to block
it, we're not weighing in on the
constitutionality of the law yet,
we're going to wait and see how
this plays out in the lower courts.
But the problem here is the law is
written in such a way that it would
not be enforced by lawmakers or
politician or
officials in the state of Texas.
It would be essentially be enforced
by private citizens throughout
the country who work as snitches as
soon as they suspect that someone
is aiding and abetting a woman in
getting an abortion in the state of
Texas >> Okay, let's break it down.
So first on decision,
I just want to give an important
context here so, they're doing two
things that are important.
One is they're saying
the trick worked.
Texas set up a trick so that
the state is not enforcing the law,
but these vigilantes are.
And the five Supreme Court justices
were like, great trick now we know
what you're doing,
it's the state passing the law that
in effect bans abortion.
They're not dumb people,
they are perfectly aware what
the trick that's being played and
they're like, well done.
So because of that loophole that
you created,
when they sue different branches of
the government, the branches of
the government go, we have no
standing, we're not necessarily
going to enforce this law.
So they're bringing the lawsuit
against the wrong people.
They'd have to bring it against
Joe Blow when he actually catches
one of those evil women, and
I don't know if he throws a net
over her or something, and
tries to cash in on his $10,000,
that's when it would become a case.
Now, legally, there is some truth
to that, except for the fact that
it's an obvious attempt to
actually undermine a law and
the United States Constitution as
interpreted by the Supreme Court.
So that's why the four other
justices, including John Roberts,
were like guys, keep it real,
this outlaws abortion.
And so, you're using a technicality
here, which was the intended point
of the law, as I said, okay, so,
but the second thing that it does
is that means in effect now,
it's in effect.
>> Yeah. >> So
it is the law of Texas as we stand
now, until a court reverses it.
Because what a court could
have done is hey,
let's adjudicate this and we'll
tell you this constitutional or
not, but in the meanwhile,
it doesn't go into effect,
because there are serious questions
about its constitutionality,
which happens all the time and
which is more normal.
And in this case, they said,
we're not sure, go for it,
let's see how it turns out.
And so that's why people
are rightfully freaking out, saying
that's it, basically abortion's now
illegal in the state of Texas.
And now, of course,
as you all know that is not going
to affect everybody in Texas.
Rich people don't care at all,
they could just hop up the plane,
they don't have to go to Paris or
anything, they could go to a nearby
state, so that's pro choice and
they will, they will,
you know they're all hypocrites.
>> Of course. >> You know the right
wing gets abortions nonstop and
we've covered those stories before.
There's some of them will even join
the picket line and
go get an abortion and then when
you ask what the hell did you do?
They'll say no no no,
it was inconvenient for me, but
these people are evil, okay?
So the rich Republicans will
continue to get abortions to no end
in Texas, they always have and they
will going forward, but poor people
who can't afford flights out, well,
they're stuck and they now live
under religious rule in Texas.
>> Yeah, that's exactly right.
>> And that's just a fact.
>> And by the way,
when the Supreme Court weighed in
on abortion in the, of course, Roe
v Wade case, the whole argument was
about the viability of the fetus
outside the womb, right?
What is life, and
if a fetus is dependent on
a woman in order to live, right,
is it really a human life?
And I would argue no, right?
If it's not viable outside
the womb, it's not a baby, okay?
And what we're talking about here,
we're not even having a discussion
about a fetus.
It's not even considered a fetus
until you hit the eight week mark,
it's considered an embryo.
So we're having a debate about
embryos right now as tens of
thousands of Texans have died in
the state over the last year,
that's what it looks like at seven
weeks.
Is that viable outside the womb?
Is that the same thing as
a human life?
I would argue, no, it is not.
But if you're a religious person,
and you believe that it is
that organism is the same thing as
a living, breathing human being,
then by all means,
don't have an abortion.
But your religious views should not
dictate the laws of the land.
We're supposed to live in a country
that separates church and state.
And so if we're going to consider
embryos the same thing as a living
breathing human, then we need to
ensure that we have enforcement to
prevent men from masturbating and
wasting that precious human
organism known as sperm, right?
That's how ridiculous this whole
argument is.
And it's not about human lives.
As I've said on the show multiple
times, if this was really about
human lives then the evangelicals
who have been pushing for
these types of draconian laws would
be up in arms about the ban on
mask mandate in the state of Texas.
They'd also be in arms about what
Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick
said early on in the pandemic,
in this video from April of 2020 as
Coronavirus numbers were spiking.
Here's what he has to
say about human lives.
>> Crushing the markets,
we're crushing this country.
And when I said when I was with you
that night, there are more
important things than living, and
that's saving this country for
my children or my grandchildren and
saving this country for all of us.
And I don't want to die nobody
wants to die.
But man, we got to take some risks
and get back in the game and get
this country back up and running.
>> There are more important things
than living, like his precious
stock portfolio and
the precious markets.
They're such hypocrites, but
honestly at this point that
argument is boring.
Of course they're hypocrites,
of course they don't
care about human lives.
All they're doing is pandering to
right wingers and single issue
voters who somehow are able to
think of embryos as human lives.
But when it comes to actual viable
living breathing humans who
are dying right now,
thanks to the incompetence and
the greed of right wing lawmakers,
they don't care at all.
They're able to separate those
two things somehow.
I do have some of the dissenting
opinions.
Each liberal justice wrote
a dissenting opinion that I want
to share with you all in just
a minute, but Cenk,
you want to chime in?
>> Okay, yeah, so
first of all, an embryo is closer
to sperm than it is an actual human
being.
I mean, look at us,
this is what humans look like,
look in the mirror.
You saw the embryo and
you know what sperm looks like
probably so, come on.
[LAUGH] So my point to you guys is
we can draw the line anywhere,
right?
And we can have a debate about
where to draw the line.
Ana pointed out the reasonable
place to draw it, in our opinion,
is when a life becomes independent.
Well, that means it's
an independent human being, okay?
And it has its rights.
But as long as it's dependent,
whether it's you're semen or it's
an embryo, it obviously doesn't
have full rights, to say the least.
And that's why Roe vs Wade does
not have an abortion at any time.
It says that at viability,
basically at third trimester you
are not allowed to have an abortion
because at that point it's
an independent life.
So the rest of it is religious
views.
Well, I know, but
the Bible says this.
First of all, as always,
let me just say the Bible doesn't
even say that.
And you don't even believe
the Bible, because if you did,
the Bible agrees with me.
Says, no, sperm is sacred,
that is life,
you are not ever to spill seed.
Now what do you do about that
abomination?
because you don't really care about
the Bible, what you care about is
subjugating women.
>> Controlling them.
>> There's no question about
that, guys.
If you actually were even
a religious fundamentalist,
we disagree with you, but you would
say no man is ever allowed to spill
seed, it's in the Bible,
it's very, very clear.
And that is an affront and God
thinks that you're killing life.
That's it, you're done with it.
But you don't believe that,
none of you believe that.
If you're right wingers,
not one of you believes that, why?
Hypocrisy, go read the Bible,
you don't give a damn about it,
that's why you never read it.
And so now let me give you our
non-religious perspective.
I don't think abortion is a big
deal.
My God, you're not allowed to say
that in America, we live among
religious zealots and the Taliban
would be so upset if you say that.
I don't care what the Taliban
thinks, whether they're in Kandahar
or in Texas.
You're supposed to view that as
sacred.
Why, it's not my bible,
I don't believe in your religion.
No, you have to think like I do.
Well, I don't.
I don't think abortion is a big
deal at all, at all.
Well, I'm offended.
Well, I don't care that
you're offended.
You're allowed to be offended,
it's a free country.
But what you're not allowed to
do is pass laws where you enforce
your views on us.
Your views that are based
on religion,
a religion we do not all share.
And they set up the country to be
free of that.
We are not supposed to establish
a religion.
And if you don't think that's true,
you're wrong and
you're un- American.
Those are facts,
read the Constitution.
But these Taliban,
these theocrats now,
who wants to live in Texas?
Who wants to subject their wives,
their moms, their daughters to
the rule of some creepy old men who
say I'm going to tell you
what to do with your body because
God spoke to me and told me.
I don't give a damn what you
think God told you, okay?
This supposed to be a free country.
And I know that the right wing
hates freedom, their favorite thing
in the world is subjugation and
control.
>> 100%.
>> But our job is to fight back and
we're going to, aggressively.