Posted on 05/28/2019 8:04:55 AM PDT by oblomov
WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court sidestepped major abortion cases Tuesday, letting stand a lower-court ruling that Indiana cannot ban abortions for the purpose of sex, race or disability selection but allowing the state to regulate the disposal of fetal remains.
The court’s unsigned opinion appeared the product of a delicate compromise, and it stressed the justices weren’t ready—for now—to consider whether either law violates the Constitution. Instead, the three-page opinion offered procedural reasons for the different, if perhaps temporary, outcomes in both cases.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, in Chicago, had found both Indiana provisions violate Supreme Court precedents prohibiting regulations that place an undue burden on women’s rights to end pregnancies.
Tuesday’s opinion said the justices would prefer that additional lower courts weigh in on the selective-abortion issue before addressing it themselves, and that the challenge to the fetal-remains law had not properly been framed under abortion-rights precedents.
But some justices on the court’s left and right wings made public their irreconcilable views. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor filed brief statements indicating they would have left the Seventh Circuit decision intact.
Justice Clarence Thomas issued a 20-page opinion critical of abortion rights. “Although the court declines to wade into these issues today, we cannot avoid them forever,” he wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Thomas’ opinion indicates that there are some moistened fingers in the air on the Right side of the Court. Not good.
Just another waste of time by those States which will sanctify Abortion until the moment of Birth (if not after).
Now back to our regularly scheduled broadcast.
This is how the elites will avoid overturning Roe v Wade and Planned Parenthood v Casey: The Supreme Court either won’t take any abortion cases, or if they do, they will never rule on the side of life. Get used to it; this is the new normal.
Why are there any laws about abortion? Why do the courts make pronouncements about abortion? Why do legislators make laws for and against abortion?
Because a human life is in question.
Why don’t they do with all laws about abortion and let the mother throw the newborn into the trash, or in a river, or down the toilet?
Because a human life is in question. The baby’s life.
The State exists to protect the citizens. The State makes laws that protect citizens’ lives. Or should. In some areas the State has done away with all laws and actually does allow the mother to dispose of the baby, by proxy, using the services of an abortion doctor. In those areas the State has abdicated its obligation to protect the lives of its citizens.
“No questions asked” drop off points for babies are ludicrous. Laws that punish leaving a baby in a trash barrel are a joke. What difference does it make if the mother kills the baby by throwing it in the trash or goes to a doctor to have it ripped to shreds? No difference at all!
It is sad to say but yes you are most likely correct.
The judicial system is setup to consider previous rulings by the Supreme Court.
This is why the RATS pulled out all the stops to ram thru Healthcare.
Once its in place and ruled by the Supreme Court, it is almost impossible to get rid of.
I’ve said this on other threads, but all of the recent abortion bans will be struck down by lower courts and SCOTUS will refuse to hear the appeals. The anti-Roe justices will not want to count on Roberts, so there won’t be the necessary four votes to hear the case. Maybe three, maybe two, maybe one, and maybe you’ll get a written dissent from denial of cert out of it, but there won’t be four votes because they know they can’t count on Roberts and despite what anyone pretends, the justices do consider such things when voting.
Let’s be clear. Roberts will not be the fifth to overrule Roe. He’s too much of a coward to do the right thing by a 5-4 vote. But he might be the sixth. If an anti-Roe woman replaces Ginsburg, then I can see Roberts going along with a decision to overrule it, because that would give him opinion assigning power, and he could give it to the woman, which would provide “his” Court with some cover.
But, as it currently stands, the slaughtering of babies will continue to be labeled a constitutional right.
And all this assumes Kavanaugh is really anti-Roe. I’m not so sure about that. (The other three are solid).
This seems like the legal equivalent of having a speed limit of 65 mph ... unless you’re late for work or rushing home for a Little League game.
If SCOTUS can sidestep then so can the state. Just enforce the law anyway. I don’t beleive the supreme court should be able to decline to hear a case. That makes lower far less vetted courts the supreme law.
Years ago there was an article in Time about genetic research. Some genetic scientists say they may one day be able to determine personality trait from fetal DNA samples. They specifically cited predispositions toward homosexuality and criminal behavior as examples. If there really is such a thing as a “gay” gene, or a “mean” gene (no relation to the late great wrestling announcer) all the pontificating about medical ethics will not prevent somebody from spilling the beans, for a price. Then it will only be a matter of time before a woman seeks an abortion only because her Dr told her the “unviable tissue mass” she’s carrying around may turn out gay. Or a serial killer. Or both (john Wayne Gacy, Son of Sam, Jeffrey Dahmer, etc) Then the earth will fall off it’s axis as militant pro choicers turn into pro lifers faster than Kyle Busch on steroids.
When God is tired of it, Scriptural prophecy will be fulfilled, and Jesus will come again to rid the earth of people like abortionists and other killers. Soon. Very soon.
Don’t hold your breath.
It’s astonishing what He puts up with.
Unfortunately this logic also opens the possibility that a certain political party might advocate engineering everyone to be “’bisexual”. That way everyone will have the same sexual orientation, and discrimination in that sphere will be a thing of the past. Isn’t utopia wonderful?
He gave ancient Israel plenty of rope - and when it ran out, it wasn't pretty.
(Don't ever think America can't be driven to her knees like Israel was.)
"The Supreme Court sidestepped major abortion cases Tuesday, letting stand a lower-court ruling that Indiana cannot ban abortions for the purpose of sex, race or disability selection [??? emphasis added]"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
The Supremes are wrongly ignoring that states have never expressly constitutionally prohibited themselves from banning abortion for the indicated reasons, the misguided Court arguably positioning to protect the constitutionally non-enumerated, politically correct “right” to have an abortion to try to save the Democrats in 2020.
In other words, post-FDR era, institutionally indoctrinated justices are still evidently determined to ignore constitutionally unchecked state sovereignty to prohibit the murder of unborn children imo.
In fact, using inappropriate words like "concept" and "implicit" here is what was left of 10th Amendment-protected state sovereignty after FDR's state sovereignty-ignoring justices got finished with it in Wickard v. Filburn.
"10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
"In discussion and decision, the point of reference, instead of being what was "necessary and proper" to the exercise by Congress of its granted power, was often some concept [???] of sovereignty thought to be implicit [??? emphases added] in the status of statehood." —Wickard v. Filburn, 1942.
The remedy for corrupt Supreme Court…
Patriots need to continue to support PDJT in draining the swamp out of the Supreme Court.
Remember in November 2020!
MAGA!
Supreme Court will not overturn Roe v Wade. At this point, these abortion bans will do little but fire up their base.
It is legal in the United States to abort a child because she is female.
It is illegal to do this in India, China and much of the world.
NOTHING kills as many women every year as sex-selection abortion. More than 20 million women are killed every year in this activity. Even where it is illegal, the practice continues.
Conservatives and pro life advocates fail to stress this outcome enough even though it goes to the heart of the pro abortion lie— we love women.
That is a absolutely untrue because it is legal to kill someone because they are female.
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.