Posted on 12/12/2018 8:19:29 AM PST by SeekAndFind
We have a 4-2-3 court.
4 leftists, 2 fence sitters and 3 conservatives.
Too many top-shelf Republicans secretly love abortion because they’re afraid of their wives.
Rush was right.
There are 327 million people in the United States. 70 million is a hell of a lot of people on Medicaid.
the situation here revolves around the Court refusing to carry out its duty to act on an issue. This unconstitutional “act of omission” is just as bad as an “act of commission,” Thomas argued.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Exactly as they failed to stop the Kenyan from Indonesia from usurping the Presidency.
I observe that the Medicaid reimbursement issue may indeed re-emerge in another context, and the Court should take up the issue. That does not make Kavanaugh’s decision against hearing this case any more reassuring to pro-life Americans, however.
The justice’s decision not to hear Gee v. Planned Parenthood does not reveal him as a supporter of the nation’s largest abortion provider, but it does signal that Brett Kavanaugh is unwilling to address important issues before the Court, merely because of their tangential connection to a controversial political issue.
This bodes ill for the prospect of the Supreme Court taking up an abortion case that might challenge Roe v. Wade, and it may even suggest that Kavanaugh would be unwilling to join a majority striking down the Roe v. Wade ban on state abortion laws.
Furthermore, the fact that Gee v. Planned Parenthood involved states’ rights on the Medicaid funding issue suggests that Kavanaugh would take the politically “safe” side on another states’ rights issue — namely whether states could outlaw abortion.
The justice’s decision not to stand for states’ rights here may suggest a reticence to fight for states’ rights and repeal Roe v. Wade.
When millions of pro-life Americans cheered at Kavanaugh’s confirmation, they likely hoped that he would join the fight to restore states’ rights on the abortion issue. The justice dealt a tragic blow to that hope on Monday.
When I heard Susan Collin’s reasons for voting FOR Kavanaugh, I was already disturbed because she cited his reluctance to overturn past the Supreme Court decision on Roe v. Wade as one of her reasons for voting for him.
The Christine Blasey Ford issue was really a side show. What should have been front and center was Kavanaugh’s judicial philosophy. I think Trump might have nominated a Justice Kennedy clone....
Kavanaugh had already asserted that RoevWade was “settled law” before he was confirmed. He’s not doing anything other than what he stated he would. My guess is he will fill the role that the swing voter Kennedy opened. No more and no less.
Is PP private or government?
It’s brutal that Kavanaugh did that after all that was risked for him. NO different than a Romney or a McLame spitting in the faces fo the rank and file.
It’s brutal that Kavanaugh did that after all that was risked for him. NO different than a Romney or a McLame spitting in the faces fo the rank and file.
In other words, not only would slimy John Roberts but now you might add a “me too” cowardly Brett Kavanaugh to those too fearful of broaching an untouchable like Planned Parenthood (what a joke is that term) but they don’t dare go anywhere near the “illegal alien’s rights” to steal us blind paying for whatever they want!
There are no fewer than three of these cases circulating in the circuit courts.
Despite the hoopla and the hysteria, they are NOT strictly about abortion, but rather about how Medicaid laws “involving” abortion can be restricted by states. In other words, how much authority do states have over federal programs.
In the Sixth District, an Arkansas law has prohibited the use of Medicaid funds for abortion.
The USSC in this case rejected hearing the case on grounds of “standing,” namely the people/group bringing the case are not the appropriate people/group to bring it. The underlying assumption by those who want to get past the hysteria is that the USSC wants several of these cases at once, which DO have standing, so it can make a broad ruling rather than piecemeal this.
Such a decision would have broad and sweeping ramifications for EVERYTHING related to state limits on Medicaid, including something as simple as crutches or medical marijuana.
In short, neither the critics nor the celebrants of this “decision” have anything to stand on yet.
But the case isn’t about abortion.
Or their daughter might need one some day.
I still believe a better case would be one with documented evidence of PP using medicaid money for abortions. Ruling on the IDEA of Medicaid being used for “low-income women’s healthcare” as a mandate from a state government is not one that I see as legally winnable and would likely expand Roe’s reach. Both under Roe and the 14th amendment.
Mark Levin was right..........certainly the fight for him was more than worthy but you simply need to look at his opinion that Obamacare is a tax and you’ll see that he’s going to side with Roberts a vast majority of the time.
RE: My guess is he will fill the role that the swing voter Kennedy opened. No more and no less.
If so, that is NOT what conservatives want. We do not want another Kennedy, we want another Scalia.
Too many top-shelf Republicans secretly love abortion because they’re afraid of their wives.
Or their side dish female interns at risk of pregnancy.
I am alarmed at the number 70 million on Medicaid. Thanks Obama.
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.