Didn't a few Supreme Court justices perjure themselves before Congress when they testified that they considered Roe v. Wade "settled law?"
140
365
39
2,713
No. This is a really stupid grasp.
7
11
Not at all.
2
20
But it is. 1) Affirming precedence isn’t perjury, precedent can be overturned. 2) These affirmations were made before Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization case & facts were presented. 3) RvW precedent couldn’t hold its own against Dobbs v Jackson.
4
2
Replying to @SadieMills19
They were asked how they saw it. They lied.

Jun 24, 2022 · 6:03 PM UTC

1
1
15
Replying to @marwilliamson
They didn’t lie. They were asked how they saw RvW at the time & answered - it was established precedent. *Precedent can be changed*. And since, a new case establishing better precedent has been ruled on. The statements & new ruling are not in contradiction or grounds for perjury.
1
2