BREAKING NEWS: US Supreme Court Strikes Down Texas Anti-Abortion Law!
Here’s the skinny from the New York Times:
The Supreme Court on Monday struck down parts of a restrictive Texas law that could have reduced the number of abortion clinics in the state to about 10 from what was once a high of roughly 40.
One part of the law requires all clinics in the state to meet the standards for ambulatory surgical centers, including regulations concerning buildings, equipment and staffing. The other requires doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.
“We conclude,” Justice Breyer wrote, “that neither of these provisions offers medical benefits sufficient to justify the burdens upon access that each imposes. Each places a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking a previability abortion, each constitutes an undue burden on abortion access, and each violates the Federal Constitution.”
Well, things are certainly looking up when it comes to the Supreme Court.
This is why who ends up on the Supreme Court matters so much, and why Republican obstruction of President Obama’s Constitutional duty is a dangerous, unprecedented game.
This Texas law accomplished exactly what it planned to do – shut down clinics and force women to give birth or risk a self-induced abortion. This was in no way about women’s health.
America’s favorite robe-wearing clown, Clarence Thomas, outdid himself with his dissent. He laments the Supreme Court creating “rights like the right to abortion into preferred constitutional rights, while disfavoring many of the rights actually enumerated in the Constitution. But our Constitution renounces the notion that some constitutional rights are more equal than others. … There is no room for the judiciary to invent tolerable degrees of encroachment. Unless the Court abides by one set of rules to adjudicate constitutional rights, it will continue reducing constitutional law to policy-driven value judgments until the last shreds of its legitimacy disappear.”
This from the same person who just last week authored the majority opinion in Utah v. Strieff, which erodes the exclusionary rule concerning evidence or warrants found on a person after a stop considered illegal under the Fourth Amendment. Thomas wrote “that the Fourth Amendment violation was ‘at most negligent’ and was based on ‘good-faith mistakes.'”
So I guess there are tolerable degrees of encroachment.
“This is why who ends up on the Supreme Court matters so much”
Ultimately for the nation, this is the tall pole in the tent for this election. When one branch of government (Congress) has ceased to be a responsible institution, the nation can ill afford any degradation in the ability of the other two branches to their responsibilities. While I generally spend more time on national security and world considerations, I never lose site that we rely heavily upon the SC to inject sanity into our national security and our domestic policies.
Holy Shit! This is shocking. The SC just made taking bribes legal, (provided you don’t help the person who gave you the money). I’m not lawyer, but this seems to open every bribery conviction made in the past 20 years to appeal.
In reading excerpts from the decision, it appears that Court felt the government did not present sufficient proof that there was any quid pro quo on the part of McConnell for the ‘gifts’ he received.
Hey, maybe Chaka Fattah’s career isn’t over after all.
One more — Supreme Court on Monday ruled that reckless domestic assaults can be considered misdemeanor crimes to restrict gun ownership
This is good news too.
Interesting note on the gun restriction case. 6-2 vote. The no votes were Justices Thomas and Sotamayor.
Pro Gun vs. Pro Choice….hard to tell which is more fanatic in their support.
Not really. Fanatics are marked by uncritical zeal. Pro Gun fits that label much more readily. But, okay. You wanted to play a little “both sides do it” so, fine. Whatever.
Pro choice is about one’s autonomy over their own health and reproductive decisions.
The McDonnell decision sounds shocking, but you must remember that the Virginia laws on accepting gifts are amazingly loose. Also realize that the vote was 9-0.
The answer is better laws governing corruption. Delaware could take a step in that direction by passing a better lobbying-transparency law.
“The answer is better laws governing corruption. Delaware could take a step in that direction by passing a better lobbying-transparency law.”
I agree. Fat chance if they want all those names on the high rises in Wilmington to stay there, though.
The Supreme Court also knocked down the laws in Wisconsin and Mississippi that required doctors providing abortions to have admitting privileges.