Leaked draft says that Supreme Court has voted to overturn Roe v Wade

[Capitalist Pig]

"6 weeks pregnant" doesn't mean what you think. The count starts from the first day of your last period, not the date of conception. Most women do not find out that they're pregnant until after they've missed their period. A woman is technically considered over 4 weeks pregnant at this point. Furthermore, menstrual cycles can vary in length from month to month. 28 days is the average, but its completely normal to have a sequence of cycles with lengths 28, 30, 33, 27, etc, which means that a woman might not be alarmed until many days after her first missed period.

Not coincidentally, states with 6 week bans on abortion have heavy regulations to limit the number of legal open clinics and create a shortage of available appointments. Before this case was brought to the supreme court, Mississippi had only one open abortion clinic in the entire state. As you might guess, that clinic was consistently fully booked two weeks out. States also have laws requiring women to attend a "counseling session", obtain multiple pelvic exams, or endure mandatory waiting periods before they're legally allowed to have the procedure. Basically they give you a minute to complete an obstacle course but start the timer at 50 seconds.

Okay, but this isn't something that Roe v. Wade fixed, is it? Also, Roe v. Wade did not make mention of when or how abortions should be carried out. This does sound like typical bureaucratic incompetence, whether intentional or accidental, and I agree it is a problem. Again, this is a matter for the voters in that state to make noise about, and fire up the elected representatives who are in a position to do something about it. If necessary, sue the state for violating its own laws by creating barriers to accessibility.

I understand what you're saying, but if a law has little to no impact either way (at least, on this matter) why is it good that it was overturned?

Because it was a bad law.

Are you afraid of your federal government having the power to pass other decisions that would have more impact, and would override certain things in the Bill of Rights?

That could be an issue, sure. It's concerning to me when the federal government overrules the constituency in a state of the union. Imagine if the federal government decided to enforce the federal marijuana ban in states that have voted to legalize it, as opposed to their current policy of looking the other way. There would be a massive outcry from the public and state governments. Everyone would be crying tyranny, overreach, and states' rights would take front and center in the argument. The other problem I have is people who are okay with the feds having a heavy hand when it suits their agenda. They don't realize how this power can be used against them if we got another Trump in office and they decide to start pushing their own agenda, using all of these nice legal precedents laid out by "the good guys" before them. We have to be mindful of these things when we're championing our causes and think the government ought to do this or that.