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

Skip to comments.

Court Allows Inmates to Get Abortions
AP ^ | 03/24/2008

Posted on 03/24/2008 12:57:21 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd

(AP) — The Supreme Court turned down an appeal Monday from a county sheriff who objects to transporting jail inmates for elective abortions.

An Arizona sheriff wanted the justices to allow him to enforce a jail policy that bars transporting inmates for abortions without a court order.

Arizona courts said the policy violated the inmates' constitutional rights. A federal appeals court in Missouri recently issued a similar ruling in a case there.

The justices did not comment on their decision to leave the Arizona ruling in place.

The Arizona Court of Appeals called the Maricopa County policy an "exaggerated response" to the requirements of running a jail. It noted that the state and Pima County voluntarily transport inmates for abortion services.

The American Civil Liberties Union had sued to challenge Sheriff Joe Arpaio's policy on behalf of an unidentified woman who discovered she was pregnant shortly before being taken into custody after being sentenced. She sought an abortion but sheriff's officials refused to transport her until she obtained a court order.

State law prohibits spending public money for an abortion unless needed to save a woman's life. The appeals court said no county spending for the actual abortion was at issue in the case.

The county routinely and safely transports many inmates to and from a variety of locations for medical services and other purposes, the court said. Arpaio gave no indication that transporting women for abortions posed security problems, the court said.

The case is Arpaio v. Doe, 07-839.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; joearpaio
USSC to Sheriff Joe: You WILL aid and assist in the murder of babies.
1 posted on 03/24/2008 12:57:22 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Just horrible. ON so many levels.

Do you know how justices voted or was it an anonymous cowardly decision?


2 posted on 03/24/2008 1:02:06 PM PDT by eleni121 (EN TOUTO NIKA!! +)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
The county routinely and safely transports many inmates to and from a variety of locations for medical services and other purposes, the court said. Arpaio gave no indication that transporting women for abortions posed security problems, the court said.

"Safely."

Oh, are they all arriving pregnant, or is that another matter?

3 posted on 03/24/2008 1:15:07 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand (Free New York)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eleni121

I can’t find who voted for or against. All I could see was that they refused to even hear the case.

8 years of Bush. 4 years of Bush Sr before that. 8 Years of Reagan in the White house as well.

Adds up to 20 years of Republican opportunities to select SC justices that would overturn the American Holocaust known as abortion.

They haven’t done it.

Sickening.


4 posted on 03/24/2008 1:19:53 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (Typical White Person)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

I hear you. The GOP leadership has failed LIFE. They have put “cooperation with evil” and economic issues ahead of the moral ones...for the most part.

Of course the Dems are far far worse.


5 posted on 03/24/2008 1:24:36 PM PDT by eleni121 (EN TOUTO NIKA!! +)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

True, but this Bush is 2 for 2, as far as I can tell. Unfortunately he lacks the ability to create more vacancies. But Souter, Kennedy, and O’Connor have been disastrous.


6 posted on 03/24/2008 1:40:19 PM PDT by xjcsa (Has anyone seen my cornballer?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa

There is no reason at all to think that President McCain’s justices will be any better.


7 posted on 03/24/2008 2:55:25 PM PDT by madprof98 ("moritur et ridet" - salvianus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: madprof98

There is no reaston at all to think that Obama or Hillary’s justices will be any better.


8 posted on 03/24/2008 3:51:02 PM PDT by LucyT (Sixteen years and four election cycles later, Hillary’s still here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LucyT

reaston = reason


9 posted on 03/24/2008 4:16:19 PM PDT by LucyT (Sixteen years and four election cycles later, Hillary’s still here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: madprof98
There is no reason at all to think that President McCain’s justices will be any better.

Exactly, none whatsoever. (sigh)

10 posted on 03/24/2008 5:45:16 PM PDT by xjcsa (Has anyone seen my cornballer?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

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