Posted on 09/28/2017 9:50:37 AM PDT by Coronal
A federal court struck down a law in Kentucky on Wednesday that requires women seeking an abortion to first undergo an ultrasound and hear a description of the embryo or fetus.
The U.S. District Court Western District of Kentucky ruled that the state law is unconstitutional because it violates the free-speech rights of the patient and doctor, court documents showed.
The law “does not advance a substantial governmental interest, is not drawn to achieve the government’s interests, and prevents no actual harm,” U.S. District Judge David Hale wrote in his ruling.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
The corrupt courts are missing the obvious-—”The right for a child to pursue life, liberty and happiness”...the most obvious of all rights.
Every second lost in the killings represents lost revenue.
On January 20, 2010, President Obama nominated Hale to serve as the United States Attorney for the Western District of Kentucky, in place of David L. Huber who had resigned. His nomination was reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee on April 22, 2010 and he was confirmed by the Senate on April 29, 2010.
On March 31, 2017, Hale ruled against the dismissal of a lawsuit accusing Donald Trump of inciting violence against protesters in Louisville, Kentucky. During a campaign rally on March 1, 2016, Trump repeatedly said “get ‘em out of here” while pointing at anti-Trump protesters. According to the protesters, as they were escorted out they were repeatedly shoved and punched by his supporters.
Trump’s attorneys moved for dismissal of the case, arguing he was protected by free speech laws, and wasn’t trying to get his supporters to resort to violence.
America has enemies and we know who they are.
“The requirement violates the speech rights of doctors and patients by forcing them to deliver and listen to a government-mandated message, according to the lawsuit.”
Patients are already required to do that for any number of other medical pocedures.
We only have one abortion clinic left in the entire state. I drive by it every work day. There are usually protesters there.
“Prevents no harm” ??!!
Isn’t the purpose of the legislation to prevent abortions, to stop the fetus’ death?
Sometimes the lack of critical reading and thinking skills appalls me.
It's astounding the life within a mother is not protected under the Constitution IF the mother CHOOSES to end it. Killing a pregnant mother is two counts of murder. A father killing the baby is murder or are both scenarios semantics according to the left and a-hole judges?
If the Founding Fathers even remotely thought killing a baby by a mother would turn into an elective "medical procedure" and "human right",they would have put specific wording to protect the unborn. They would be aghast in what goes on today. They would think it's Hell on Earth. Anyone who sees a baby on Ultrasound and hears a heartbeat but still aborts is pure evil.Those who deny this technology are just as evil. It's sickening.
“The requirement violates the speech rights of doctors and patients by forcing them to deliver and listen to a government-mandated message, according to the lawsuit.”
Now if it was a cake. Forcing someone to bake a cake is perfectly ok.
The courts are now nothing more than a pretense. There actual purpose is deep-state-dem control over the populace. Forget elections. Forget laws. Forget enforcement of laws. The men-in-black *are* the law.
"The law “does not advance a substantial governmental interest, is not drawn to achieve the government’s interests, and prevents no actual harm,” U.S. District Judge David Hale wrote in his ruling."
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
Patriots are reminded that the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect the so-called “right” of women to have an abortion like they did with the rights they expressly protected with the Bill of Rights for example.
In other words, the “right” to have an abortion was not only wrongly legislated from the bench by state sovereignty-ignoring activist Supreme Court justices imo, but they breached the Founding States' division of state and federal government powers by stealing unique state powers to deal with life and death issues to establish this fictitious constitutional right.
In fact, with all due respect to the family, friends and supporters of the late Terri Schiavo, note that the Supreme Court refused to hear her case, identifying her case as a state power issue.
So the courts are practicing politically correct double standards on state power-related life and death issues imo.
But what’s arguably even worse than the courts practicing double standards is that career federal lawmakers are wrongly staying silent on attacks on state sovereignty by the courts imo.
Patriots need to pink-slip as many career lawmakers as they can in the 2018 elections and replace them with state sovereignty-respecting patriots.
In the meanwhile, patriots need to make sure that there are plenty of state sovereignty-respecting patriots on the primary ballots.
The information required by the law is no different than other medical information and advice and cannot be said to be either unnecessary or not in the government’s interest, in so far as patients making a fully informed decision is in the government’s interest, and leaving out the information required by the law makes the decision one that is less fully informed than it would have been.
The required information cannot even be presumed to be prejudicial, to the patient or the medical practitioners as it cannot be presumed that the information will in fact alter any decision.
The judges are asses, and acting in a political manner of trying to protect positive decisions toward an abortion by shielding patients from medical information that might possibly alter their decision against an abortion. That outcome is neither for the courts nor abortion providers to secure as rights to themselves.
Because leftists like their voters dumb and ignorant. How despicable!
Would taking out this judge constitute “actual harm”?
quote: “does not advance a substantial governmental interest, is not drawn to achieve the government’s interests, and prevents no actual harm,” Pretty mush says it ALL about the attitude of the Government.
U.S. District Judge David Hale is a Barack Obama appointee.
Someone explain to me why a Convention of the States is more dangerous than ever-expanding judicial tyranny.
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.