Users Online Now:
1,758
(
Who's On?
)
Visitors Today:
1,013,688
Pageviews Today:
1,761,222
Threads Today:
687
Posts Today:
13,492
07:17 PM
Directory
Adv. Search
Topics
Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Subject
SUPREME COURT REJECTS BID TO RESTORE ALABAMA ABORTION LAW/ Georgia abortion providers file federal suit today p. 3
User Name
Font color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
Black
Font:
Default
Verdana
Tahoma
Ms Sans Serif
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
[quote:Trained Noticer:MV80MDc1MDEzXzczODM5MzU5X0Q3MDk1QjAw] [quote:Jake:MV80MDc1MDEzXzczODM5MjgxXzZEQkVDNzQ4] There is a real reason why democrats build planned parenthood centers in all black cities. [/quote] How so, Jake? Roe v Wade was ruled in 1973. Thomas became a Justice in 1991. Please 'splain... :bf90: [/quote]
Original Message
[
link to thehill.com (secure)
]
Supreme Court rejects bid to restore Alabama abortion law
Thank you, Justice Thomas
The Supreme Court on Friday declined to hear a case on a 2015 Alabama abortion law that bans a common form of the procedure during the second trimester of pregnancy.
Alabama had sought to overturn lower court rulings that struck down the law, but the justices rejected that bid in their order.
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a concurring opinion that he agreed the court should not hear the case, but called it
a "stark reminder that our abortion jurisprudence has spiraled out of control."
"Although this case does not present the opportunity to address our demonstrably erroneous 'undue burden' standard,
we cannot continue blinking the reality of what this court has wrought," Thomas wrote.
In the concurring opinion, Thomas indicated that he would have ruled in favor of upholding the 2015 Alabama law, writing that the
"notion that anything the in the Constitution prevents states from passing laws prohibiting the dismembering of a living child is implausible."
Alabama lawmakers behind the law had referred to the procedure as "dismemberment."
------ this issue is not going away -----
this happened today: [
link to www.npr.org (secure)
]
Georgia Abortion Providers File Federal Suit Against State's 'Fetal Heartbeat' Law
Pictures (click to insert)
General
Politics
Bananas
People
Potentially Offensive
Emotions
Big Round Smilies
Aliens and Space
Friendship & Love
Textual
Doom
Misc Small Smilies
Religion
Love
Random
View All Categories
|
Next Page >>