I mean, this is a crisis. There's a constitutional crisis in terms of two extremely divergent views of how to understand the constitution that both carry significant trajectory changes and neither of which sound very helpful. There's a political crisis going on with neo-nazi influence in and around the Republican party that's not being dealt with at all. There's a digital war on-going that's been heating up for the past two-ish decades that promises to get worse. There's a literal housing crisis. There's more, but that's a short list I think most people can agree on.
> ... extremely divergent views of how to understand the constitution...
IMO, there's good in this situation, because inferring a nebulous right to privacy that didn't do very much was always a little questionable thing for the supreme court to do. It was a "good enough" measure that prevented us from doing any better.
Yes, it's terrible that poor women in red states will have to pay the price.
But ultimately, we're going to have to figure out how to define a right to privacy and make it into real law. And we can maybe fix other things, like security/privacy in our papers and effects and not rely upon 19th century judicial compromises on policing power and searches, too.
> There's a political crisis going on with neo-nazi influence in and around the Republican party that's not being dealt with at all
Honestly, the Republican party is <<slowly>> making itself less relevant. Which is kind of bad-- a relevant and not-crazy political opposition is a useful thing to a society.
