Skip to comments.Judge Overturns North Dakota Ban on Abortions After Six Weeks
Posted on 04/16/2014 11:51:37 AM PDT by don-o
A federal judge has overturned a law the North Dakota legislature passed to ban abortions after six weeks of pregnancy.
At 22 days into pregnancy, before most women know they are pregnant, unborn children complete the development of their heart to the point that a heartbeat begins and the bill would stop abortions at that point. The law was meant to ban abortions when the unborn babies heartbeat begins but would have been applied at six weeks of pregnancy.
Some pro-life groups were not on board with the legislation, not because they oppose banning abortions but out of a concern that it would be struck down in court if passed, since the Supreme Court is currently dominated by at least a 5-4 pro-abortion majority. As a result, the legislation would be struck down in court and the ruling would add to the case law that supports Roe vs. Wade. Such groups are working to change the courts so Roe can be overturned and legislation like the Heartbeat bill or others could be approved to provide legal protection for unborn children.
(Excerpt) Read more at lifenews.com ...
Net result - more innocent blood shed and more of God's wrath stored up.
Lord have mercy. Please.
sure why not?
why do we even have a state legislatures?
Why can’t everything be decided by the Kings appointed judicial Barons?
The worst ruling of the year by far!!!!!!!! Repulsive.
Unless you try to pass these pieces of legislation, one will not know. It’s the struggle.
The way I see it, a number of cases that hit the courts still have pro-life victories. I feel like slowly, the pro-life side makes positive strides.
Good for ND to at least pass this legislation.
These judges should be impeached
Why bother voting or legislating laws anymore? Obama will make declaration and the will of the people will be over ruled by a judge.
RULE OF LAW! RULE OF LAW! (squawk) RULE OF LAW!
Isn’t this all we hear about BLM vs. Bundy?
Make up your minds you reatarded libs!
Follow the Bundy example and IGNORE the courts, shut them down through zoning restrictions and other BS bureuacracy. There is only one operating in the state it think. You have to use the Alinsky tactics so often used against us. Make the public environment openly hostile to them.
It is okay to murder a baby at five weeks, six days of pregnancy, but not after six weeks of pregnancy or six years after birth?
The time will come when these “judges” themselves will be put on trial and will be forced to give an account for their decisions. “I was just following the law” will sound suspiciously like, “I was just following orders” to our progeny.
Making law isn’t following it
States can nullify federal laws - they should nullify federal judicial edicts as well.
How about a post natal abortion.
True enough. It does beg the question, however whether the use of constitutional rubrics lends itself to such calamities of thought? And if so is the Constitution itself best suited to remedy this grave injustice?
I think not. I do believe there will come a time that the American people will repudiate the horror of abortion and their reasoning and their actions will not be dependent upon the intrigue and machinations of influencing a court via the Presidency or control of the Senate to confirm members of said court.
But we’ll continue to fight on this battlefield but let us not kid ourselves into thinking it is the end-all be-all.
My belief is that we have to go after the entire antiquated legal system. Far more corrupt, untouchable and subsidized than the evil corporations, people continue to elect and kowtow to.
If “our side” would explain how unnecessary and expensive our so-called system of justice is, especially in light of information technology, the whole legal/political/lobbying empire could fall very quickly.
There is truth in what you say. However, I would be hesitant to employ the technocrats in our judicial system. I’m always distrustful of so-called “experts” who relish in their own superiority of knowledge to decide what is the proper course.
Antiquated? Yes. But necessary. After all, our beliefs are old. What we are seeing is the application and interpretation of “modern” theories of jurisprudence that lead us into these dark corners.
And just who would we be explaining these things? My own belief is that there is no more convincing to be done. The battle lines have been drawn all that is left is the final act. But then I’m cynical.
Just as with so-called gay rights, the states have never amended the constitution to expressly protect so-called abortion rights. So as a consequence of parents not making sure that their children are being taught either 10th Amendment-protected state powers or the difference between legislative and judicial powers, activist justices are getting away with wrongly legislating such rights from the bench.
Ignore it! Continue with the abolition of such procedures.
After six weeks!? Applied to judges as well. Abort them ba$tard$, too!
My thoughts and feelings exactly.
The bad thing is, if it is any worse, it looks like one single solitary judge overturned it. That sure is not just. I think one judge overturned prop 8 in California as well.
It would be unjust no matter what but one person shouldn’t decide these things.
In other news, a dog bit a man. And, a clock in town square struck 12 today, around noontime.
When are we going to learn that the Judiciary no longer fulfills its Constitutional role, but exists only to advance evil?
Sure seems to me that there are a lot of people with power that will some day wish that THEY had never been born.