(not sure who asked, but thank you for the ask to respond) OPINION 1) the court

(not sure who asked, but thank you for the ask to respond)

OPINION
1) the court reversed Roe Vs Wade for strategic reasons: (a) it did not result in ‘settled law’ which is the purpose of hte court. (b) RvW delegitimized the court by taking on a matter that was (obviously) reserved for the states. (c) the court has a series of thes (corrections) that it is trying to reverse in response to Scalia’s influence that the court wsa no longer fulfilling its mission and instead had become a vehicle for activism that circumvented the states, and the federal legislature, and as such teh people.

2) I have a very hard time imagining the court taking this case unless the argument is something it can thoroughly support. OPINION: As far as I know a known violent criminal, capable of harm, and resisting arrest, who was held down, and complaining like all other criminals do who are guilty, died because of an accident, and becaues there was too much commotion around the officers. I do not believe the officer should have been guilty of anything other than a suspension and training so that it doesn’t happen again. It did affect the workd’s stactics but it also showed how successful neck control is in containing criminals. And that there are no alternatives that are as easy or successful. HOWEVER: I don’t see a venue for the court to reverese the conviction unless they can make the case that it was either handled improperly somehow, or motivated such that it was a political prosecution given that no other similar prosecutions have been made.

Reply addressees: @Babygravy9 @theammind