All right.
Let's get into audience questions for the week.
A lot of questions about the Supreme Court.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg and one of those questions I received from many people in the last few
days is whether Roe v. Wade is gone.
If Donald Trump replaces Ruth Bader Ginsburg, it does seem I mean, listen, we're going to
see what happens, but it seems increasingly likely that Donald Trump is going to be able
to fill that vacancy on the Supreme Court.
Whether they do it before Election Day.
I don't know.
But even if Joe Biden were to win on November 3rd, it does maybe even more so if Joe Biden
were to win on November 3rd.
It does seem that there are going to be enough votes from Republicans in the Senate.
Remember, you need 51, Republicans have 53.
And only two senators have said they would wait at least until after the election.
We don't we don't know if they would insist on waiting until the inauguration.
It seems they're going to have 51.
So one of the big questions is whether Roe v. Wade, which is a landmark United States
ruling on abortion, would be taken down by a six to three conservative court, which is
what it would be if Donald Trump replaces Ruth Bader Ginsburg with a right wing ideologue,
which he certainly would do if given the opportunity.
Remember that Roe v. Wade is a ruling that says states can't ban abortion altogether.
Now they can almost ban it.
So we've seen a whole bunch of different states increase restrictions on any medical provider
that does abortions, restrict who can get an abortion or what needs to happen in order
to get one.
And sometimes these restrictions are challenged in court and sometimes they go very high in
in the appeals process.
And what is ultimately left to the interpretation of the Supreme Court when those appeals get
to the court is whether they violate the spirit of Roe v. Wade.
So in practice, the way you overturn Roe v. Wade is by change, by creating new precedent.
A state would issue some very, very strict ruling on abortion, and it would get appealed
all the way up to the Supreme Court.
And the Supreme Court might say this is OK.
If that were to happen, you have effectively, by precedent undone Roe v. Wade and you would
have many things change in red states and not very much would change in blue states.
The reality is that if Roe v. Wade were effectively overturned by Newt by creating new precedent,
states like Massachusetts, other blue states are not likely to see any real changes to
the availability and access to safe abortions.
The red states will get absolutely crushed.
And this is another one of those ways in which I've said before, even during the Trump presidency,
in blue states, we are insulated in many ways from the destructive effect of a radical ideological,
reactionary presidency like that of Donald Trump.
So as is often the case, the destruction brought forward by Republican policy and Right-Wing
Ideology will disproportionately hurt right wingers.
When you look at Trump trying to undo Obamacare in Massachusetts.
We already have something that predates Obamacare called Romneycare.
And it is the folks in places like Mississippi which has one of the worst one of the worst
three health care systems in the country.
It is those folks who are disproportionately hurt by Donald Trump doing things like undoing
the individual mandate on Obamacare.
So that's a reality that if they're able to do it, not a lot will change in blue states.
A lot will change in red states.
Now.
Does the Republican Party really want Roe v. Wade overturned?
The reason I ask is if they actually overturn it, it's conceivable that there will be no
one significantly renewed enthusiasm against Republicans at the state level in order to
try to legalize abortion in a lot of these states that are likely to overturn it.
And the reality is that since Roe v. Wade was was issued as a decision, it has been
a great fundraising tool for Republicans.
Republicans raise a ton of money by saying we've got to overturn Roe v. Wade.
We need you to vote for this person and that person and that person from low level positions
all the way up to the president.
We need you to do it so we can get the right people in power to overturn Roe v. Wade if
they actually do it.
They no longer have that carrot to rile up evangelical voters.
I think that there is some merit to that.
And I question whether Republicans really want to overturn it or whether they want to
keep fighting about overturning it because it allows them to raise money.
It's a question.
But is Roe v. Wade in danger with a six to three court, particularly if Donald Trump
gets reelected?
And particularly if we maintain a Republican Senate?
Yes, it is in danger.
What it will mean in Massachusetts is a different question.