Skip to comments.North Dakota's 'heartbeat' abortion law is overturned
Posted on 04/17/2014 4:46:33 AM PDT by TurboZamboni
BISMARCK, N.D. -- A federal judge on Wednesday overturned a North Dakota law that bans abortions when a fetal heartbeat can be detected, which can be as early as six weeks into pregnancy and before many women know they're pregnant.
U.S. District Judge Daniel Hovland said the law is "invalid and unconstitutional" and that it "cannot withstand a constitutional challenge." The state attorney general said he was looking at whether to appeal the decision by the Bismarck-based judge.
North Dakota is among several conservative states that have passed new abortion restrictions in recent years, but abortion rights supporters called North Dakota's fetal heartbeat law the most restrictive in the country. A fetal heartbeat law passed in Arkansas would ban abortions at 12 weeks into pregnancy, but it was overturned by another federal judge. The state's attorney general has said he will appeal.
(Excerpt) Read more at twincities.com ...
So, protecting a life is unconstitutional? Heaven help this country and its greedy pro-abortion crowd!
What business is that of his? Just rule on the LAW. This isn't an NCAA bracket prediction. Idiot.
That judge has sentenced babies to death.
He should have to attend some abortions.
Maybe get his hands wet, so to speak.
And the Left wonders why fewer Americans respect the laws they force on us.
The various states are going about this all wrong.
While I personally believe the Supreme Court was wrong when they declared abortion a constitutional “right”, that is now the law of the land
What is needed is a new constitutional amendment clearly stating that abortions are not allowed.
There are many reasons to oppose abortion on demand (besides the obvious one of killing babies). Abortions on demand has fundamentally changed our society. I believe a case can be made that our current illegal alien problem can be linked to aborting our next generation. (Politicians are not stupid, they know that programs such as Social Security are a ponzi scheme. They only work as long as new people come into the system. Abortions on demand has cut into the potential “new members” in the scheme. Replacements had to be found. So rather than enforce our emigration laws, they (the politicians) pay lip service to the law while at the same time encouraging more into our country. An influx of people that do not share our history, our language our culture, has changed our society.
Appeal to the next higher court!
The most endangered species on the plant is an undborn child. All kinds of laws to protect the spotted owl, desert tortoise, and others, but protection for humans in the womb? Silch.
What a hateful bunch of people the pro Abortionist crowd is.
Headline should read: Judge Hovland Sanctions Murder
Sodomy must be celebrated, children must be murdered. So decrees the federal judiciary. The people are not fit to rule themselves.
Anyone buying this lie?
I swear, if I ever got another dog, I’d teach him to read, then give him a list of Federal judges to bite.
It’s a Dubya judge...
Hovland, Daniel L. Born 1954 in Moorhead, MN
Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U.S. District Court, District of North Dakota
Nominated by George W. Bush on June 26, 2002, to a seat vacated by Patrick A. Conmy. Confirmed by the Senate on November 14, 2002, and received commission on November 26, 2002. Served as chief judge, 2002-2009.
Concordia College, B.A., 1976
University of North Dakota School of Law, J.D., 1979
Law clerk, Hon. Ralph J. Erickstad, North Dakota Supreme Court, 1979-1980
Assistant attorney general, State of North Dakota, 1980-1983
Private practice, Bismarck, North Dakota, 1983-2002
Commissioner, Bismarck [North Dakota] Park and Recreation District, 1992-2002
Administrative law judge, Office of Administrative Hearings, State of North Dakota, 1994-2002
Jews not being able to own guns was the law of the land in Nazi Germany.
Aryan Germans not being able to marry Jews was the law of the land in Nazi Germany.
Do I have to go on? We don't need a Constitutional Amendment; we need to rid ourselves of thieves, murderers, oppressors and tyrants.
“Anyone buying this lie?”
What lie is that?
So moms can murder their living unborn.... great.
The constitution provides a non-violent way to change things.
In what world would such a thing get two-thirds of the House, two-thirds of the Senate and 38 states' approval? It couldn't clear even one of those hurdles, much less all three.
Lex iniusta non est lex. (Latin: An unjust law is no law at all)
The rule of law is long gone. What we have instead is the rule of elite preference as imposed on us by our appointed judges, who make this stuff up as they go along and then have the nerve to claim they are just following the constitution.
A “lump of tissue” can have a beating heart?
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.