FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Posted on 01/13/2014 7:43:10 AM PST by Olog-hai
It appears your state of New Mexico isn’t leading the pack either!!
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/20/us-usa-abortion-albuquerque-idUSBRE9AI0KA20131120
Yeah, that was disappointing news.
There's a lot of stuff screwed-up in this state, I'll admit it.
EXACTLY!! Eff SCOTUS!
Clearly clinic rules and regulations do have an effect.
Here in PA where Kermit Gosnell did his dirty work, new regs were passed, but its sad that when three different people were governor, 2 R’s and 1 D, the Gosnell clinic was not inspected by the state health department.
The grand jury that indicted Gosnell and others said “politics” was involved in the case. The prosecutor never followed up on that.
But our GOP controlled legislature and Republican governor chose not to pass or promote any kind of 20-week ban legislation at all.
BUT THE TWENTY WEEK BAN ON ABORTIONS IN TEXAS THAT REPUBLICANS PASSED WAS A SYMBOLIC POLITICAL ACT WITH NO TEETH TO IT AND BOTH PARTIES AND THEIR AFFILIATED ORGS LIKE PLANNED PARENTHOOD AND NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE ARE PUTTING ON A SHOW IN OPPOSING IT AND SUPPORTING IT TO RAISE MONEY FROM UNSUSPECTING GRASSROOTS SUPPORTERS WHO DON’T REALIZE THEY ARE BEING HUSTLED BY THE POLITICAL MACHINES.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Back in the 1950s, Arkansas ignored a SCOTUS order to integrate Central High School in Little Rock. President Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard and ordered them to enforce to SCOTUS order.
And no, I am not comparing abortion to desegregation. I am just pointing out that the federal courts can call on the federal Executive Branch to enforce their orders and, if the President is on board, the Feds outgun the states. (If the President is not on board, things can be very different, as when President Jackson ignored SCOTUS's order against removing the Cherokee Indians from their land.)
No one on SCOTUS voted for or against the Arizona law. SCOTUS simply refused to hear the case (as they do with 98% of the cases that are brought up). There were no opinions written and no recorded dissents. The result is that the 9th Circuit decision stands, but it is not binding precedent outside of the 9th Circuit; SCOTUS's refusal to hear a case does not establish any precedent.
The 9th court is a God forsaken nightmare! It makes NO difference what
the voters vote for THEY overturn EVERYTHING! How old are these justices? Something HAS to be done about this DAMNED court!!!
SCOTUS ping. (NB: This was a denial of certiorari, not an actual SCOTUS decision.)
You got it.
Just like I've been saying right along.
NRTL's main focus, which is "twenty week" "and then you can kill the baby" bills, are immoral, unconstitutional, and ultimately USELESS at stopping abortion on demand.
Wake up, people!
The "strategy" of the "pro-life" industry is now thoroughly discredited.
AZ should pass a new but very similar law and enforce it ,,, if the 9th circus becomes involved just use delaying tactics ...
Right. State nullification of unconstitutional federal government interference with states' freedom. Abortion is by no means allowed or delegated by the Constitution to the federal government no matter how convoluted the contortionists on the Left twist the Constitution. Abortion is plainly and clearly not a federal issue. With clear and valid legal reasoning, AZ should just ignore SCOTUS on this one.
No, hardly the way this rogue, out-of control POTUS does it. AZ has a constitutional argument. Obama illegally ignores the Constitution.
Yeah but “SCOTUS Denies Cert for 9999th Time This Session” isn’t as attention-grabbing, now is it? ;p
Please note: No one on SCOTUS voted for or against the Arizona law. SCOTUS simply refused to hear the case (as they do with 98% of the cases that are brought up). There were no opinions written and no recorded dissents. The result is that the 9th Circuit decision stands, but it is not binding precedent outside of the 9th Circuit; SCOTUS’s refusal to hear a case does not establish any precedent.
Then AZ should nullify the 9th circuit decision for the same reasons given on Post #32.
anybody still think SCOTUS is “conservative”?
They need to pass a tax on abortion doctors, clinics, nurses and abortions themselves. Then it would be Constitutional.
You can tax Americans as much as you want you just cannot take away their welfare, same sex marriage rights or the right to kill your baby.
Federalism is a joke played on conservatives by “conservative” politicians and “conservative” judges.
It’s a club. I’ve been reading what the SCOTUS did during the government caused Great Depression. Once FDR got the political heat going they just fell in line with whatever the flavor of the day was in DC.
Why stand up for the Constitution when it pays so well to just go along? How many billions does the Constitution pay out? How many billions does ignoring the Constitution pay out?
That’s where we’re at. The funny thing is that one of the founding “progressives”, Charles Beard, said he hated the Constitution and called it illegitimate because the Founders wrote it to their own economic benefit and not for the benefit of the common man.
Now, the common man is a slave to a government that ignores the Constitution and is steeped in the crony capitalism practiced by the modern plutocracy. I look forward to kicking Beard in whatever rear his spirit currently possesses. I hope I have to wait a long time until that day, though.
Do you have a link to that source or information?
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.