Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BREAKING: Federal Judge Declares Texas Abortion Restrictions Unconstitutional
Townhall ^ | October 28, 2013 | Christine Rousselle

Posted on 10/28/2013 6:08:56 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

This July, lawmakers in Texas passed a bill that restricted abortion after 20 weeks gestation, required clinics to comply with higher health standards, mandated that doctors have admitting privileges in nearby hospitals, and mandated an FDA-approved protocol for RU-486 administration. Following a lawsuit by Planned Parenthood, a judge has ruled that the parts of the law are unconstitutional.

District Judge Lee Yeakel wrote Monday that the regulations violated the rights of abortion doctors to do what they think is best for their patients and would unreasonably restrict a woman's access to abortion clinics.

Lawyers for Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers brought the lawsuit, arguing that a requirement that doctors have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the abortion clinic would force the closure of a third of the clinics in Texas. They also complained that requiring doctors to follow the Food and Drug Administration's original label for an abortion-inducing drug would deny women the benefit of recent advances in medical science.

The judge found that requiring that a doctor have admitting privileges is unconstitutional, and that the requirement of an FDA-approved protocol for administrating RU-486 maybe lifted in cases necessary to preserve the life of health of the mother. The restriction of abortion after 20 weeks was not challenged in this case.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is expected to file an appeal.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: abortion; anticonstitution; babykillers; corruptjudge; eugenics; genocide; hatesconstitution; moralabsolutes; plannedparenthood; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

1 posted on 10/28/2013 6:08:56 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Another “monkey” judge in his “monkey court” who doesn’t have a clue about what the U.S. Constitution says.


2 posted on 10/28/2013 6:11:17 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (ObamaCare should have been tested on politicians before being released to the public!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Gee that’s a shock.


3 posted on 10/28/2013 6:11:24 PM PDT by Steely Tom (If the Constitution can be a living document, I guess a corporation can be a person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

OK, then. Require abortion clinics to have all the same capabilities as a hospital ER, so they can handle the emergencies that may come up.


4 posted on 10/28/2013 6:11:49 PM PDT by butterdezillion (Free online faxing at http://faxzero.com/ Fax all your elected officials. Make DC listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

>>> regulations violated the rights of abortion doctors to do what they think is best for their patients

Like Sebelius who denied the little girl a lung transplant?


5 posted on 10/28/2013 6:13:00 PM PDT by Safrguns (PM me if you like to play Minecraft!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Ignore this judge and let him try to enforce his ruling.


6 posted on 10/28/2013 6:13:36 PM PDT by RightOnTheBorder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

declare the ruling invalid because its a state matter


7 posted on 10/28/2013 6:13:51 PM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

GOOD!

Overturn on Appeal!

There is no Constitutional protection which this law violates.


8 posted on 10/28/2013 6:16:25 PM PDT by G Larry (Let his days be few; and let another take his office. Psalms 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

When is a law not a law.


9 posted on 10/28/2013 6:19:16 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
to do what they think is best for their patients

The baby is their patient whether they like it or not.

Killing your patient is never in his or her best interest.

10 posted on 10/28/2013 6:21:23 PM PDT by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer
How many divisions does the "monkey judge" have?

Ignore him.

11 posted on 10/28/2013 6:22:21 PM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Killing your patient is never in his or her best interest.

That was before "fundamental change" was "brought to America."

12 posted on 10/28/2013 6:22:45 PM PDT by Steely Tom (If the Constitution can be a living document, I guess a corporation can be a person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RightOnTheBorder

“...Ignore this judge and let him try to enforce his ruling....”

I agree. Enough is enough.
Enforce the state law as passed by the Republic.
Force these communist bassturds’ hand.


13 posted on 10/28/2013 6:23:00 PM PDT by lgjhn23 (It's easy to be liberal when you're dumber than a box of rocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Yeakel, Earl Leroy III
http://www.fjc.gov/servlet/nGetInfo?jid=3017&cid=999&ctype=na&instate=na

Born 1945 in Oklahoma City, OK

Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U.S. District Court, Western District of Texas
Nominated by George W. Bush on May 1, 2003, to a seat vacated by James R. Nowlin. Confirmed by the Senate on July 28, 2003, and received commission on July 29, 2003.

Education:
University of Texas, B.A., 1966
University of Texas School of Law, J.D., 1969
University of Virginia School of Law, LL.M., 2001

Professional Career:
U.S. Marine Corps, 1967-1970
Private practice, Austin, Texas, 1969-1998
Justice, Third Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998-2003; chief justice, 1998


14 posted on 10/28/2013 6:26:27 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

A Dubya appointee !

Yeakel, Earl Leroy III Born 1945 in Oklahoma City, OK

Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U.S. District Court, Western District of Texas
Nominated by George W. Bush on May 1, 2003, to a seat vacated by James R. Nowlin. Confirmed by the Senate on July 28, 2003, and received commission on July 29, 2003.

Education:
University of Texas, B.A., 1966
University of Texas School of Law, J.D., 1969
University of Virginia School of Law, LL.M., 2001

Professional Career:
U.S. Marine Corps, 1967-1970
Private practice, Austin, Texas, 1969-1998
Justice, Third Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998-2003; chief justice, 1998


15 posted on 10/28/2013 6:27:24 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (Resist We Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

someone please explain to me how abortion isn’t denying the right to life to the unborn

abortion is blatantly unconstitutional


16 posted on 10/28/2013 6:31:46 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj; NormsRevenge

It surprises someone here that the GOPe is really pro-abortion? Every first lady I can think of was pro-abortion back to Lady Bird or Pat. How many men here don’t side with their wives on major issues?


17 posted on 10/28/2013 6:33:58 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (Ted Cruz/Sarah Palin 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

“A Dubya appointee !”

And you find that surprising?


18 posted on 10/28/2013 6:34:29 PM PDT by RKBA Democrat (The Last Election, November 5th 2013)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer
Judge Yeakel is a Dubya appointee, JD from UT Austin, service in the Texas state courts at the appellate level.

Not a forum-shopped judge, I don't think. But then, he sounds very Bushy ....

19 posted on 10/28/2013 6:35:22 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
University of Texas, B.A., 1966

University of Texas School of Law, J.D., 1969

Bingo! That Explains It!

20 posted on 10/28/2013 6:38:15 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

We knew this would happen, and said so.

Quit passing laws that end with “and then you can kill the baby,” and start passing laws that provide all children with the equal protection that the supreme law of the land absolutely requires for every person, in every state.

If the judges don’t like it, impeach them. Send them a nice reminder that you swore to support and defend the Constitution, not their immoral, unconstitutional opinions.


21 posted on 10/28/2013 6:38:59 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Micah 7:3
Both hands are skilled in doing evil; the ruler demands gifts, the judge accepts bribes, the powerful dictate what they desire— they all conspire together.

Luke 18:2
He said: “In a certain town there was a judge who neither feared God nor cared what people thought.


22 posted on 10/28/2013 6:43:03 PM PDT by Some Fat Guy in L.A. (Still bitterly clinging to rational thought despite it's unfashionability)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Texas should declare itself a “sanctuary state” for the unborn child and ignore any federal law.

Hey, libs can do it with sanctuary cities...why can’t we with states?


23 posted on 10/28/2013 6:43:27 PM PDT by ealgeone (obama, border)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Isn’t the SCOTUS the only court that can declare unconstituionality, by way of Marbury vs. Madison?

from my homepage...

___________________________________________________________________
I’ve posted this in a couple of places and it doesn’t seem to get much more than a yawn, even though it’s kinda-sorta an incremental approach.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1908148/posts?page=125#125

I believe a fetus is a human being who deserves protection under the law from being killed.
***I do too. That fetus deserves protection extended by the state.

I do wonder if it is biblical to extend “full” protection to a fetus? I.e. when a man hurts a pregnant woman, he’s expected to pay an eye for an eye & a tooth for a tooth. But if the unborn baby is killed, the price is not the same.

Perhaps it is time to consider a 3 (or even 4) tiered system of protection.

Tier 1: Living, viable, late term baby which will not be aborted unless the life of the mother is at stake.

Tier 2: Living, not-yet-viable pre-born human who should have the right to protection and life and a safe womb to which it can attain viability. Cannot be aborted unless there is an open rape case associated with the pregnancy or the life of the mother is at stake.

Tier 3: Living, early stage, not yet viable pre-born human for whom we do not extend the rights of life in this society because of a historical snag where we once considered such tissue not to be a baby. We as a society thought it was best to consider it a private decision. I personally do not believe in Tier3 abortions, but I can understand that there are many who think it is a “right to choose” at this stage. It may be time to consider a program where the woman declares her pregnancy and intent to abort. Our societal function at this point would be to provide a family that is willing to adopt this baby and to put up this woman for 6-8 months in a safe environment so the baby can grow and maybe the woman can learn some life skills. If our society cannot muster the forces necessary to save this baby, the woman has the sickening “right” to abort this pregnancy. Time for us to put up or shut up.

With a 3-tiered plan in place, women would stop using abortion as a means of birth control. Millions of lives would be saved. We would extend the right to life to every human that we have resources to save. Unfortunately, if we cannot put up the resources to save the Tier3 babies, we still would have this horrible practice staining our nation’s soul.

125 posted on 10/08/2007 1:43:20 PM PDT by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

___________________________________________________________________


24 posted on 10/28/2013 6:43:27 PM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

ALTERNATE HEADLINE: Federal Court Judge Declares 10th Amendment Unconstitutional


25 posted on 10/28/2013 6:46:37 PM PDT by LaybackLenny (Sarah Palin - Last Man Standing (Ironic, ain't it?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

How much you wanna bet this “judge” didn’t bother to cite the specific section of the U.S. Constitution that supports his “unconstitutional” finding in this case?

I am sick to death of these Men In Black overturning the will of the people and state legislatures for political purposes. It’s pure tyranny by judicial fiat.


26 posted on 10/28/2013 6:49:48 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I wished that Governor Perry would tell the federal judge to “exit” his state and not return. Then implement the law anyway. If any “agency” or “entity” or “person” (federal, state, or local) attempts to interfere with the implementation....arrest them and escort them to the border.

THIS IS SOMETHING WORTH FIGHTING ABOUT. If the “Tea Party” would be as 1/10th as concerned about this (and stopping the homosexual agenda) as fiscal matters (like Obamacare) then legal abortion would end and homosexuals would go back into the closet (at least they would be seriously set back).


27 posted on 10/28/2013 6:54:23 PM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
District Judge Lee Yeakel wrote Monday that the regulations violated the rights of abortion doctors to do what they think is best for their patients and would unreasonably restrict a woman's access to abortion clinics.

Seriously? How many doctors set on doing what is best for their patients enter the abortion industry? And I'm pretty sure that requiring abortion mills to meet basic health and safety regulations would not restrict their clients at all from entering.

I wonder if those who use abortion as birth control ever stop to think about the implications of the fact that abortion mills fight tooth and nail to not be subject to minimal standards.

28 posted on 10/28/2013 6:55:41 PM PDT by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Just another clown judge who, like all liberals, thinks every live birth is a cosmic failure.


29 posted on 10/28/2013 7:02:30 PM PDT by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

He was a lawyer in the Marine Corp right?


30 posted on 10/28/2013 7:06:34 PM PDT by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll eventually get what you deserve)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sten

I couldn’t agree with you more.


31 posted on 10/28/2013 7:20:13 PM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: philetus
I say all simple procedures should be allowed to follow these same rules. If the doc is only doing a tonsillectomy or a skin cancer removal or cataract surgery they should not have to have a MD/OD 8 weeks of training should do. They should not have to be associated with any hospital nor be forced to provide any after care. They should be able to do pretty much what ever they want including doing these procedure on children without the parents knowing. Heck let us let them also do assisted suicide even if the person being assisted protests and claim he/she wants to live. These brave and selfless folks should not be regulated unless they are undercharging planned parenthood for abortion services. Yea that's my story and I'm sticking to it. (Sarcasm)
32 posted on 10/28/2013 7:29:08 PM PDT by cotton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: RightOnTheBorder

Ditto that.
Ignore and invite him to come enforce. It’s time we stood up to judges legislating from the bench!


33 posted on 10/28/2013 7:32:21 PM PDT by boxlunch (Psalm 2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The secret clue is hidden in the Constitution behind the eminence of the penumbra, where only black-robed mystics can see it.


34 posted on 10/28/2013 7:41:21 PM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton

Exactly!


35 posted on 10/28/2013 7:42:03 PM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I think the fifth circuit will overturn and the SC will let it stand rather than try to settle it unless a different outcome happens in some other state.


36 posted on 10/28/2013 7:46:24 PM PDT by unlearner (You will never come to know that which you do not know until you first know that you do not know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stevem

Humbley, I offer this correction.
Every live birth except their own.
One of my brothers was once married to a flaming liberal who ranted how babies were dumb, dirty etc.
Mom looked at her and said that, yes, perhaps HER mother SHOULD have had an abortion.


37 posted on 10/28/2013 8:02:02 PM PDT by bog trotter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RKBA Democrat

Generally, such a knee-jerk pro-infanticide ruling would tend to be the hallmark of a Carter/Clinton/Zero appointee.


38 posted on 10/28/2013 8:12:25 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (Resist We Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Texas should just secede. They’d take the Southeast, Arizona, New Mexico, the Midwest up to the Canadian border and most, if not all of the the Mountain states.

The country would be split in three and very quickly, the west coast and northeast would fade into oblivion. Just have to set up an Israeli type border to keep all the west coasters and northeasters out so they don’t ruin the place.


39 posted on 10/28/2013 8:14:50 PM PDT by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer; All
Another “monkey” judge in his “monkey court” who doesn’t have a clue about what the U.S. Constitution says.

"Constitutonal" and "unconstitutional" are PC terms, good enough for low-information citizens.

40 posted on 10/28/2013 8:14:51 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Enforce it anyway.


41 posted on 10/28/2013 8:16:29 PM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

IOW, a left-wing activist judge who hates the Constitution


42 posted on 10/28/2013 8:18:48 PM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion
If he was really serious about following current laws and regulations, he would have made the docs get umpteen second opinions and follow the approval of a telephone nurse who must decided if it will be an allowed procedure for a precondition.

Even if insurance isn't paying for this one.

43 posted on 10/28/2013 8:29:58 PM PDT by texas booster (Join FreeRepublic's Folding@Home team (Team # 36120) Cure Alzheimer's!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Another Bush appointee judge that is a F’n disgrace.


44 posted on 10/28/2013 8:37:10 PM PDT by Farnsworth (One Big Assed Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

What exactly in the Constitution has been violated.
Article /section / etc. reference would be appreciated.


45 posted on 10/28/2013 9:32:25 PM PDT by Huskerfan44 (Huskerfan44 (22 Yr, Navy Vet))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Yup... if a doctor wants to run a charnel house that’s his bees wax, I guess.

Let him prescribe pot, though, and there is a huge to-do.


46 posted on 10/28/2013 10:21:03 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (The Lion of Judah will roar again if you give him a big hug and a cheer and mean it. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj
A Dubya appointee !

That explains it I guess, since all the Bush women are pro abortion. Would include this, </sarcasm>, if it were not true.

47 posted on 10/28/2013 11:05:47 PM PDT by itsahoot (It is not so much that history repeats, but that human nature does not change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Okay Ladies, Either

- abortion is healthcare and would seem to be subject to whatever regulation healthcare is subject to; or,

- healthcare shouldn’t be regulated at all; or,

- it’s okay to regulate healthcare but abortion is not healthcare, it’s instead a procedure such as tinting your hair/filling your nails and should not receive government support.

Make a decision.


48 posted on 10/29/2013 3:44:41 AM PDT by jimfree (In November 2016 my 13 y/o granddaughter will have more quality exec experience than Barack Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

I would think certain standards for medical care are in order, but to be the devil’s advocate here, as a doctor I can practice any medicine I wish to, but I may not have privileges. For example, if I hang a shingle to do face lifts in my office or hair transplant surgery, the law will not prevent me from doing that. If I practice improperly I may lose my license, but otherwise I can practice. I may not find an insurance carrier to insure me, or a hospital to give me staff privileges.

In summary, why should abortions be different? If people are paying for the procedures out of pocket then they should go wherever they please, on the other hand, if the abortion is paid for by taxpayer then shouldn’t the public have some say on the level of care.

Lastly, how can people argue both sides? For example, how can you argue that planned parenthood should be paid by the gov’t but the gov’t has no right to assure the quality of the care.

I see that some provisions of this law might be unconstitutional, but were any doctors filing this? Aren’t they the ones with standing here?


49 posted on 10/29/2013 10:28:35 AM PDT by nikos1121
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: nikos1121

Thanks for perspective.

I am sure that AG Abbott will represent the State & Citizens of Texas appropriately.


50 posted on 10/29/2013 11:02:49 AM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson