Equal Protection Of Citizenship Is In A State Of Sedition Because Of Supreme Court Ruling On Abortion

[Robert W]

" Traitors Against Us Republic Promoting Sedition "

* Disingenuous Cowards *

That is not an explanation for " logically , of course , a legitimate state interest . . not . . prior to live birth " .

The dobbs ruling is dumbfounded and sedition against us 14th , 9th , 1st and 10th amendments , that with malevolent malfeasance dismissed the definition of a person in title 1 section 8 of us code as any born alive at any point in development .

Thanks to you, I wasted a lot of time producing the correct evidence.
I see you think you are wiser than the Supreme Court.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Justices With Partisan Hack Blinders That Ensured Mentally Retardation "

* Could Not Justify Or Too Stupid To Understand The Obvious *

Thanks to you, I wasted a lot of time producing the correct evidence.
I see you think you are wiser than the Supreme Court.

Wisdom has nothing to do with dumbfounded conclusions and blatant stupidity of dobbs justices who need to have a " logically , of course " statement , from a wiser justice blackmun , explained to them so they could figure out the roe v wade court ruling .

Clearly , roe v wade court substituted an ability for a fetus to survive a IMMINENT live birth , at natural viability , in lieu of a live birth requirement for equal protection with a us citizen , and ruled that state interests could begin in third trimester to include proscribing abortion and used a loosely constructed neologism as a " potential life " .

* Difficult To Defend Is A Statement Expected From A Dumbass *

. https://supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf .
Under this scheme, each trimester of pregnancy was regulated differently, but the most critical line was drawn atroughly the end of the second trimester, which, at the time,corresponded to the point at which a fetus was thought to achieve “viability,” i.e., the ability to survive outside the womb. Although the Court acknowledged that States hada legitimate interest in protecting “potential life,”1 it found that this interest could not justify any restriction on previability abortions. The Court did not explain the basis for this line, and even abortion supporters have found it hard to defend Roe’s reasoning.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Explain Why Any Would Be Required To Explain Logically Of Course "

* Acknowledging Whey Awl Have Off Daze *

" Justices With Partisan Hack Blinders That Ensured Mentally Retardation "

• Could Not Justify Or Too Stupid To Understand The Obvious *
• Difficult To Defend Is A Statement Expected From A Dumbass *

Perhaps applying the term dumbass is excessively harsh , however given stoicism in institutions of legalese , it is therefore that blackmun would not be compelled or expected to publicly explain a logically of course statement , especially to any other justices among those levels of acumen .

 

[Robert W]

" Justices With Partisan Hack Blinders That Ensured Mentally Retardation "

* Could Not Justify Or Too Stupid To Understand The Obvious *

Wisdom has nothing to do with dumbfounded conclusions and blatant stupidity of dobbs justices who need to have a " logically , of course " statement , from a wiser justice blackmun , explained to them so they could figure out the roe v wade court ruling .

Clearly , roe v wade court substituted an ability for a fetus to survive a IMMINENT live birth , at natural viability , in lieu of a live birth requirement for equal protection with a us citizen , and ruled that state interests could begin in third trimester to include proscribing abortion and used a loosely constructed neologism as a " potential life " .

* Difficult To Defend Is A Statement Expected From A Dumbass *

. https://supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf .
Under this scheme, each trimester of pregnancy was regulated differently, but the most critical line was drawn atroughly the end of the second trimester, which, at the time,corresponded to the point at which a fetus was thought to achieve “viability,” i.e., the ability to survive outside the womb. Although the Court acknowledged that States hada legitimate interest in protecting “potential life,”1 it found that this interest could not justify any restriction on previability abortions. The Court did not explain the basis for this line, and even abortion supporters have found it hard to defend Roe’s reasoning.

Check in with a psychologist. Final reply by me. Why? Because you have locked in and are so wild as to disagree with the Roberts Supreme Court. This nation abides those decisions and not your decisions.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Dobbs Is Sedition And Malfeasance And Its Affirmative Justices Should Be Likewise Charged "

* Mentally Retarded Public Commits Logical Fallacy Of Adhominem *

Check in with a psychologist. Final reply by me. Why? Because you have locked in and are so wild as to disagree with the Roberts Supreme Court. This nation abides those decisions and not your decisions.

Good , because you do not have any grounds upon which to respond , as a rite to privacy is not the constitutional basis for abortion , with which you agree , however the constitutional basis for abortion and the basis of roe v wade is a live birth requirement for equal protection with a us citizen , and that has been made clear and obvious .

This moniker has been providing this information to abortion choice leadership and to politicians at large for more than 25 years , to include bantering politicians directly when person was defined in title 1 section 8 of us code in 2002 .

There is no reason to abide by the sedition and malfeasance of dobbs , and its justices in the affirmative should be charged with the crimes .

 

[Robert W]

Good , because you do not have any grounds upon which to respond

I agree with the living Supreme Court. Magnificent grounds.

 

[Robert W]

This moniker has been providing this information to abortion choice leadership and to politicians at large for more than 25 years

So you instruct the US Supreme court. Wonderful.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Dobbs Defense Claims Ignorance Of The Law For Dumbfounded Conclusions And Formal Sedition Against Us Constitution "

* Us 14th Amendment Sense Us Says Know Individual Else No Legal Victim *

I agree with the living Supreme Court. Magnificent grounds.

Because states have neither the power to abrogate us 14th amendment , nor to abrogate an enumerated rite of citizens to equal protection , the abortion anti-choice require a constitutional amendment , else states are prohibited from protecting a rite to life or any which has not met a live birth requirement , where by states are prohibited from proscribing abortion .

In us republic , legitimate state interests , or federate interests , are on behalf of its individual citizens , and in us 14th amendment , an instantiation of an individual citizen includes a single non incidental requirement of live birth .

A us republic and us republic founded upon independence of the individual , with equal protection of negative liberties among individuals , logically precludes an individual has completed live birth , thereby becoming a subject by title in officiate records of census .

The traitors against us republicanism and against us republic debase the value of us citizenship and debase independence of the individual .

The dobbs justices n the affirmative have committed formal sedition against 14th , 9th , 1st and 10th amendments of us republic and formal malfeasance against title 1 section 8 of us code , and pleading ignorance of the law does not rescind the offense .