The Supreme Court ruled Friday that abortion providers in Texas will continue to be allowed to challenge the state’s restrictive abortion law but decided to not stop the law from being enforced.
The opinion, authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch, emphasizes that the question of whether the Texas law is constitutional is not the one before the court. The ruling allows lawsuits by the clinics to go forward in lower courts, while leaving the law in place for now.
Eight of the nine justices said the abortion providers may continue bringing legal challenges, and Chief Justice John Roberts, writing on behalf of himself and the court’s three Democrat-appointed justices, encouraged the district judge should act quickly.
A federal appeals court on Friday night temporarily reinstated Texas’ restrictive abortion law, staying a preliminary injunction granted earlier this week by a federal judge who sought to block the law.
The ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday night handed a win to anti-abortion advocates and lawmakers in Texas who have sought to prohibit most abortions after six weeks of conception.
The U.S. Supreme Court announced Monday it would hear a case in December that directly challenges the landmark 1973 abortion case Roe v. Wade.
The high court set Dec. 1 as the date it would hear Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which means a decision could be reached by June 2022.
This case features a challenge to a Mississippi law banning abortions after 15 weeks. The case especially addresses the constitutionality of abortion bans that take effect before a fetus would be viable outside the womb.
While pro-life candidate for governor, Glenn Youngkin continues to talk about rational pro-life measures, like preventing taxpayer funding for abortions and passing a Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, pro-abortion former governor Terry McAuliffe, is sounding one note all over Virginia: he is promising to prevent any new pro-life law and to ultimately help see Roe v. Wade codified in the Virginia Constitution.
Terry McAuliffe is making protecting abortion promoters his top priority as witnessed in his comments and actions at two events in Virginia yesterday. At a small business forum sponsored by the Multicultural Chamber Alliance in Fairfax, VA, McAuliffe’s opening remarks focused on how proud he was to have kept Virginia’s abortion facilities open as governor and stopped any new pro-life laws from being enacted. Unsurprisingly, the small business leaders were not very excited, and the only applause was from his own cheer squad that he travels with.
Later in the afternoon, he returned to Charlottesville where he made a campaign stop at the local abortion facility to promise to “be a brick wall against any anti-choice (pro-life) laws. He said clearly to those present, “I will always fight to protect women’s clinics!” Obviously, the campaign funding he has received from the abortion industry is calling the tune he dances to. Their goal is to get him elected so as to protect the abortion industry in the Commonwealth. They have no interest in protecting women’s health or the lives of the babies they carry.
Just before midnight on Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued an order denying injunctive relief to the Texas abortion providers who had sought to halt Texas’ new abortion law which prohibits abortions after an unborn baby’s heartbeat can be detected.
The majority opinion said the Court would not intervene because the plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate whether the defendants, including state judges, can or will seek to enforce the law against them. The five conservative justices in the majority, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett, noted that federal courts have the power to enjoin people tasked with enforcing laws, and not laws themselves.
The Texas law gives citizens the power to sue abortion providers or anyone who “aids and abets” an abortion after six weeks gestation. This structure provided the legal technicality which allowed the near-ban on abortion to remain in effect.
Liberal activists and progressive media compared Texas’ new pro-life law to the Taliban after it went into effect Wednesday.
“I am calling on Joe Biden and the UN to lead a humanitarian effort to airlift women out of Texas,” tweeted BotSentinel founder Christopher Bouzy. “The North American Taliban has seized control of Texas.”
Well, isn’t this interesting.
Recall Roe v. Wade? The famous abortion decision from the U.S. Supreme Court that was issued in January of 1973? It said this:
This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment‘s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or … in the Ninth Amendment‘s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.” — Roe, 410 U.S. at 153
In the vernacular, this quickly was reduced to a pro-Roe movement that self-identified as “pro-choice.” Or, as the saying goes, “abortion rights” boosters supported the idea of “my body, my choice.”
Thursday, Tennessee joined 19 other states to support Arkansas’ legal fight for its law banning discriminatory abortion based on a Down syndrome diagnosis. Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery III announced the decision on Thursday – the same day that Missouri filed the amicus brief for the case, Leslie Rutledge v. Little Rock Planning Services.
“People with Down syndrome add unique joy, beauty, and diversity to our society. Yet the abortion of children with Down syndrome approaches genocidal levels, threatening the Down syndrome community with complete elimination,” asserted the brief. “All states share Arkansas’ compelling interests in preventing the eradication of people with Down syndrome through the practice of eugenic abortion.”
According to a bill passed Thursday by the Tennessee General Assembly, the unborn are people at the moment of conception. This was accomplished through changes to civil law, by extending wrongful death liability for the unborn all the way to conception. In effect, this legislation confers personhood the moment an egg is fertilized.
The legal change in the civil definition of personhood wasn’t presented in the caption text. It was mentioned once in a single sentence under the bill’s summary. Additionally, the name given to the bill by the sponsors – the “Prenatal Life and Liberty Act” – wasn’t mentioned anywhere in the bill’s language, caption text, or summary.
A federal judge ruled a Tennessee law requiring women to wait at least 24 or 48 hours prior to abortion unconstitutional last week. The ruling impacts any aspect of the law that references mandatory waiting periods.
Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery III was named the defendant in the case.
In an interview with The Virginia Star, Kilgore shared that Barrett’s nomination was a long time coming.
“A lot of us were looking to the President, hoping he would nominate her last time instead of Kavanaugh [in 2018]. She carried herself so well during her 2017 hearing for the 7th Circuit Court, and she was a former clerk for Justice Scalia. She is a favorite justice for many conservatives throughout the nation.”