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

Skip to comments.

BREAKING: Federal Judge Declares Texas Abortion Restrictions Unconstitutional
Townhall ^ | October 28, 2013 | Christine Rousselle

Posted on 10/28/2013 6:08:56 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

This July, lawmakers in Texas passed a bill that restricted abortion after 20 weeks gestation, required clinics to comply with higher health standards, mandated that doctors have admitting privileges in nearby hospitals, and mandated an FDA-approved protocol for RU-486 administration. Following a lawsuit by Planned Parenthood, a judge has ruled that the parts of the law are unconstitutional.

District Judge Lee Yeakel wrote Monday that the regulations violated the rights of abortion doctors to do what they think is best for their patients and would unreasonably restrict a woman's access to abortion clinics.

Lawyers for Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers brought the lawsuit, arguing that a requirement that doctors have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the abortion clinic would force the closure of a third of the clinics in Texas. They also complained that requiring doctors to follow the Food and Drug Administration's original label for an abortion-inducing drug would deny women the benefit of recent advances in medical science.

The judge found that requiring that a doctor have admitting privileges is unconstitutional, and that the requirement of an FDA-approved protocol for administrating RU-486 maybe lifted in cases necessary to preserve the life of health of the mother. The restriction of abortion after 20 weeks was not challenged in this case.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is expected to file an appeal.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: abortion; anticonstitution; babykillers; corruptjudge; eugenics; genocide; hatesconstitution; moralabsolutes; plannedparenthood; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
To: 2ndDivisionVet

We knew this would happen, and said so.

Quit passing laws that end with “and then you can kill the baby,” and start passing laws that provide all children with the equal protection that the supreme law of the land absolutely requires for every person, in every state.

If the judges don’t like it, impeach them. Send them a nice reminder that you swore to support and defend the Constitution, not their immoral, unconstitutional opinions.


21 posted on 10/28/2013 6:38:59 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Micah 7:3
Both hands are skilled in doing evil; the ruler demands gifts, the judge accepts bribes, the powerful dictate what they desire— they all conspire together.

Luke 18:2
He said: “In a certain town there was a judge who neither feared God nor cared what people thought.


22 posted on 10/28/2013 6:43:03 PM PDT by Some Fat Guy in L.A. (Still bitterly clinging to rational thought despite it's unfashionability)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Texas should declare itself a “sanctuary state” for the unborn child and ignore any federal law.

Hey, libs can do it with sanctuary cities...why can’t we with states?


23 posted on 10/28/2013 6:43:27 PM PDT by ealgeone (obama, border)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Isn’t the SCOTUS the only court that can declare unconstituionality, by way of Marbury vs. Madison?

from my homepage...

___________________________________________________________________
I’ve posted this in a couple of places and it doesn’t seem to get much more than a yawn, even though it’s kinda-sorta an incremental approach.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1908148/posts?page=125#125

I believe a fetus is a human being who deserves protection under the law from being killed.
***I do too. That fetus deserves protection extended by the state.

I do wonder if it is biblical to extend “full” protection to a fetus? I.e. when a man hurts a pregnant woman, he’s expected to pay an eye for an eye & a tooth for a tooth. But if the unborn baby is killed, the price is not the same.

Perhaps it is time to consider a 3 (or even 4) tiered system of protection.

Tier 1: Living, viable, late term baby which will not be aborted unless the life of the mother is at stake.

Tier 2: Living, not-yet-viable pre-born human who should have the right to protection and life and a safe womb to which it can attain viability. Cannot be aborted unless there is an open rape case associated with the pregnancy or the life of the mother is at stake.

Tier 3: Living, early stage, not yet viable pre-born human for whom we do not extend the rights of life in this society because of a historical snag where we once considered such tissue not to be a baby. We as a society thought it was best to consider it a private decision. I personally do not believe in Tier3 abortions, but I can understand that there are many who think it is a “right to choose” at this stage. It may be time to consider a program where the woman declares her pregnancy and intent to abort. Our societal function at this point would be to provide a family that is willing to adopt this baby and to put up this woman for 6-8 months in a safe environment so the baby can grow and maybe the woman can learn some life skills. If our society cannot muster the forces necessary to save this baby, the woman has the sickening “right” to abort this pregnancy. Time for us to put up or shut up.

With a 3-tiered plan in place, women would stop using abortion as a means of birth control. Millions of lives would be saved. We would extend the right to life to every human that we have resources to save. Unfortunately, if we cannot put up the resources to save the Tier3 babies, we still would have this horrible practice staining our nation’s soul.

125 posted on 10/08/2007 1:43:20 PM PDT by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

___________________________________________________________________


24 posted on 10/28/2013 6:43:27 PM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

ALTERNATE HEADLINE: Federal Court Judge Declares 10th Amendment Unconstitutional


25 posted on 10/28/2013 6:46:37 PM PDT by LaybackLenny (Sarah Palin - Last Man Standing (Ironic, ain't it?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

How much you wanna bet this “judge” didn’t bother to cite the specific section of the U.S. Constitution that supports his “unconstitutional” finding in this case?

I am sick to death of these Men In Black overturning the will of the people and state legislatures for political purposes. It’s pure tyranny by judicial fiat.


26 posted on 10/28/2013 6:49:48 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I wished that Governor Perry would tell the federal judge to “exit” his state and not return. Then implement the law anyway. If any “agency” or “entity” or “person” (federal, state, or local) attempts to interfere with the implementation....arrest them and escort them to the border.

THIS IS SOMETHING WORTH FIGHTING ABOUT. If the “Tea Party” would be as 1/10th as concerned about this (and stopping the homosexual agenda) as fiscal matters (like Obamacare) then legal abortion would end and homosexuals would go back into the closet (at least they would be seriously set back).


27 posted on 10/28/2013 6:54:23 PM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
District Judge Lee Yeakel wrote Monday that the regulations violated the rights of abortion doctors to do what they think is best for their patients and would unreasonably restrict a woman's access to abortion clinics.

Seriously? How many doctors set on doing what is best for their patients enter the abortion industry? And I'm pretty sure that requiring abortion mills to meet basic health and safety regulations would not restrict their clients at all from entering.

I wonder if those who use abortion as birth control ever stop to think about the implications of the fact that abortion mills fight tooth and nail to not be subject to minimal standards.

28 posted on 10/28/2013 6:55:41 PM PDT by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Just another clown judge who, like all liberals, thinks every live birth is a cosmic failure.


29 posted on 10/28/2013 7:02:30 PM PDT by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

He was a lawyer in the Marine Corp right?


30 posted on 10/28/2013 7:06:34 PM PDT by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll eventually get what you deserve)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sten

I couldn’t agree with you more.


31 posted on 10/28/2013 7:20:13 PM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: philetus
I say all simple procedures should be allowed to follow these same rules. If the doc is only doing a tonsillectomy or a skin cancer removal or cataract surgery they should not have to have a MD/OD 8 weeks of training should do. They should not have to be associated with any hospital nor be forced to provide any after care. They should be able to do pretty much what ever they want including doing these procedure on children without the parents knowing. Heck let us let them also do assisted suicide even if the person being assisted protests and claim he/she wants to live. These brave and selfless folks should not be regulated unless they are undercharging planned parenthood for abortion services. Yea that's my story and I'm sticking to it. (Sarcasm)
32 posted on 10/28/2013 7:29:08 PM PDT by cotton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: RightOnTheBorder

Ditto that.
Ignore and invite him to come enforce. It’s time we stood up to judges legislating from the bench!


33 posted on 10/28/2013 7:32:21 PM PDT by boxlunch (Psalm 2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The secret clue is hidden in the Constitution behind the eminence of the penumbra, where only black-robed mystics can see it.


34 posted on 10/28/2013 7:41:21 PM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton

Exactly!


35 posted on 10/28/2013 7:42:03 PM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I think the fifth circuit will overturn and the SC will let it stand rather than try to settle it unless a different outcome happens in some other state.


36 posted on 10/28/2013 7:46:24 PM PDT by unlearner (You will never come to know that which you do not know until you first know that you do not know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stevem

Humbley, I offer this correction.
Every live birth except their own.
One of my brothers was once married to a flaming liberal who ranted how babies were dumb, dirty etc.
Mom looked at her and said that, yes, perhaps HER mother SHOULD have had an abortion.


37 posted on 10/28/2013 8:02:02 PM PDT by bog trotter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RKBA Democrat

Generally, such a knee-jerk pro-infanticide ruling would tend to be the hallmark of a Carter/Clinton/Zero appointee.


38 posted on 10/28/2013 8:12:25 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (Resist We Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Texas should just secede. They’d take the Southeast, Arizona, New Mexico, the Midwest up to the Canadian border and most, if not all of the the Mountain states.

The country would be split in three and very quickly, the west coast and northeast would fade into oblivion. Just have to set up an Israeli type border to keep all the west coasters and northeasters out so they don’t ruin the place.


39 posted on 10/28/2013 8:14:50 PM PDT by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer; All
Another “monkey” judge in his “monkey court” who doesn’t have a clue about what the U.S. Constitution says.

"Constitutonal" and "unconstitutional" are PC terms, good enough for low-information citizens.

40 posted on 10/28/2013 8:14:51 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

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