Why is this being fully deleted without any discussion, edit improvements. It is consistent with what is already within the article and consistent with what is within the spot of placement already. These are now historical events and cited with primary sources citations and related highly respected news articles. I can agree improvements can be made but total deletion is an abuse by administrators. I am requesting arbitration.
On May 2, 2022, Politico ran an exclusive article of the confirmed legitimate leaked opinion of the court where Brett Kavanaugh voted to overturn Roe v. Wade. [1] Subsequent to the release of this leaked opinion Susan Collins stated, “If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office.” [2] The Senator in 2018, made a speech on the floor of the US Senate to defend her vote for Kavanaugh, as there were substantial doubts that Brett Kavanaugh was being genuine in his promise.
The New York Times at the time described the situation stating:
“Her usually reliable Republican ally, Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, had just broken with the party against the confirmation of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. That left Ms. Collins as the sole Republican supporter of abortion rights who could derail a man seen as a serious threat to Roe v. Wade — not to mention that he had been accused of sexual misconduct.
Ms. Collins did not derail him.
Instead, she took to the Senate floor Friday afternoon and delivered a reasoned, carefully researched, 45-minute point-by-point defense of her support for Judge Kavanaugh.
“His views on honoring precedent would preclude attempts to do by stealth that which one has committed not to do overtly.”
The New York Times: Susan Collins, Standing Alone, Makes Her Case for Kavanaugh; October 5, 2018 [3]
Susan Collins in her speech vouched that Brett Kavanaugh would defend Roe: [4]
Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed 50-48, and could not have been seated without the vote of Senator Susan Collins who made the decisive vote for conformation.[5] [6] [7]
On May 11, 2022, after the leaked opinion became public, Senator Collins voted against a bill to codify Roe v. Wade into federal law.[8]
On June 24, 2022, Roe v. Wade was overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson.[9] Justice Kavanaugh once confirmed did vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. "With sorrow — for this Court, but more, for the many millions of American women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection — we dissent," the three dissenting justices wrote. [10]
In addition to overturning Roe v. Wade, in Dobbs v Jackson, the court indicated in Justice Thomas’s concurring opinion it would seek to reverse Lawrence v. Texas, Obergefell v. Hodges, and Griswold v. Connecticut. [11] [12] This will have wide implications on reinstituting state Sodomy Law to allow for the imprisonment of gay people again, stripping away Gay Marriage, and banning all forms of birth control among married adults. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.185.100.206 (talk) 05:28, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
- An article Talk page is not the place to request arbitration. That would be WP:ARBREQ. General Ization Talk 05:32, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi General Ization, I have opened the arbitration request. Before disputing, I have had talk discussions on this content that were closed without addressing the deletions. The only feedback I had was “get off your soapbox.” This article is addressing historical events, it is not a ‘soapbox’ issue.
I also requested assistance with edit clean up of article edit. I acknowledge I need assistance, especially with citation formatting, citing critics correctly to not indicate bias but capturing their professional critique. That said, I do not believe total delegation is warranted. Please feel free to assist with editing and help to resolve the dispute on this page.
24.185.100.206 (talk) 06:27, 26 June 2022 (UTC)CollinsHistorian
- I do not support your edits. I believe they are off-topic at this article, and will not support any edit that misspells the words "precedence" (look it up), or more correctly, precedents, and "among". It also includes unsourced commentary that reveals a lack of neutral point of view. Good luck. General Ization Talk 19:31, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with General Ization on this. Brian (talk) 23:54, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
OP reply; thank you for your feedback. I have made the suggested edits you referenced and instead brought in a block quote from the New York Times. The block quote is on topic with the “ Collins attracted controversy for voting to support the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court; Collins attributed her vote for Kavanaugh because she wrongly believed that he would not support overturning Roe v. Wade.” within the article. It explains why there was controversy which is currently unclear. The controversy is described here from stemming from the moment in history where the vote to confirm fell upon one senator ‘a up or down vote, Susan Collins understanding this took to the floor to make a speech to defend her vote. As far as the spelling errors I welcome corrections, not personal attacks (see open appeal). See hyperlinks before commenting on relevance for consideration on how the articles added dontie together. It is wiki policy to build consensus and be open to edits within a dispute and I will continue to do this. 2600:1017:B40B:3942:1C8E:28F2:3277:A6F5 (talk) 13:54, 27 June 2022 (UTC)CollinsHistorian
Following edits and consensus a request to add this back into the article under “Abortion” subtitle “Dobbs v. Jackson” has been put forward. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1017:B40B:3942:1C8E:28F2:3277:A6F5 (talk) 14:04, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
- There is no consensus for your massive edit. It fails WP:NPOV in addition to poor formatting and overall writing. Go one piece at a time if you want to propose a change. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:47, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
