generally speaking, laws prohibiting first-trimester abortion are not constitutional

yes

unfortunately thats true

the constitution must be amended, in order for the answer to change

they did that by changing the definition of life...

this prevents double jeopardy, which is great

and prevents waste

however, the downside is that you get stuck with things

if the dissent is too weak

it is unconstitutional, so you must amend the constitution in order to change it

or evenly divided

and that is okay

because it is a rare oddity

and considerably better than some places

where the supreme court is held hostage by the military

Or we tell scotus that they dont have the ability to imply powers upon themselves

just go south if you want a weak supreme court

go way south

And we dont need to amend the constitution at all

basically everywhere in latin america, the supreme court has little power

so prohibition was fine?

isn't it great?

imagine if the supreme court couldn't refute the laws made by progressive democrats....

prohibition was constitutional

and immoral

which is why they amended the constitution again

to make it unconstitutional

https://youtu.be/gg7qTyizi8w

and backfired

So when people are caught often stealing it becomes a crime to accuse them since they are a minority

they removed it because it failed spectaculary.... but mostly because prohibition cut their tax revenue

and it increased the crime rate because it made an american tradition a crime

and you don't take money from a politician

well, sure

it was also expensive dealing with the bootleggers

they were getting rich and it was hard to profit off of that

also it was easy money for corrupt cops wanting to get rich

It's not stealing. It's borrowing without asking and no intent to return. Also, it's their 'culture'.

they had _far fewer_ resources as well

families like the kennedy's made a fortune out of bootlegging

they didn't have the DEA to chase down the bootleggers