Posted on 03/21/2015 4:03:33 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
MADISON, Wis. (AP) – A federal judge has struck down a Wisconsin law requiring abortion providers to get hospital admitting privileges.
U.S. District Judge William Conley ruled Friday that the 2013 law is unconstitutional.
Planned Parenthood and Affiliated Medical Services had sued the state, arguing the requirement will force AMS’s Milwaukee clinic to close because its doctors can’t get admitting privileges.
(Excerpt) Read more at wbay.com ...
Our God-given individual right to life is unalienable. That supreme right precedes and supersedes any and all man-made constitutions and laws.
The Tenth Amendment speaks of the LEGITIMATE powers of the federal government, and the state governments, and the people themselves.
There is NO legitimate power to murder innocent persons.
All there is is DUTY to protect ALL innocent persons. That DUTY falls on the shoulders of ALL levels of government, and ultimately, on the shoulders of the sovereign body of the people.
Does the concept that the abortionist having admitting privileges seem like a sound idea?
It does to me.
In fact, I would a say minimum requirement.
BTTT!
So the Federal Judiciary has basically become an arm of the political parties.
The same way Walker ended the unions in Wisconsin, so will he end the tyranny of the Federal Judiciary.
WALKER/CRUZ 2016!
“U.S. District Judge William Conley ruled Friday that the 2013 law is unconstitutional.”
Conley has a name and an address. As for you mercenary US marshal traitors, you best start thinking real hard about which side you’re on. We will institute an American-style Nuremburg trial, and following orders won’t cut it.
Your post is spot on.
EVERYTHING rides on his response to this outrageous dictate from this subhuman Conley.
I worked on a few Federal Courthouses in my day.
The Federal Judges have HUGE offices complete with private secretary, plus leather chairs and all of the rest, law library and private showers/bathrooms.
I've been in the corner office of the guy who runs Citicorp and his office sucked compared to these black robed tyrant creeps(he did have on like $2,500 Alligator shoes though).
The U.S. Marshals seemed to me to be mostly useless gear queers that spend their days plotting to seize property and intimidate citizens.
"The Marshals Service is responsible for apprehending wanted fugitives, providing protection for the federal judiciary, transporting federal prisoners (see JPATS), protecting endangered federal witnesses, and managing assets seized from criminal enterprises.
When an article begins with “A federal judge”, it’s usually not good. (Judge Hanen being a rare exception.)
How do you explain the abortion laws some states had that existed prior to Roe vs Wade, and why judges in the 1800s didn’t strike them down?
Thanks for the reply. Your assessment and description of fat-ass federal fascist judges is on target.
It doesn’t matter. Both God and the Constitution absolutely require equal protection for every innocent person.
You have two choices, you can recognize the self-evident natural, biological fact that the unborn child is a human being, a person, or you can do what Blackmun and his colleagues did, which is to dehumanize, depersonify, degrade, and devalue the most helpless and defenseless of human beings and their most important right.
Even Blackmun and the Roe v. Wade majority admitted that if the “fetus” is a person, “of course” they are protected by the Constitution.
So, tell me, are they a person or not?
If you say “yes,” I don’t don’t know why there should be any further debate about lawless “laws” that grant explicit permission to murder babies as long as it is done on schedule and by some arbitrary set of rules made up from whole cloth by “pro-life” legislators.
another leftist in the judiciary...I am shocked shocked I tell you
Judge William Conley is obviously an idiot or a liar. How can this law have any constitutional implications? It requires only that a doctor who performs an invasive procedure which in some cases creates life-threatening situations for the woman be authorized to admit that woman to a hospital in a worst-case scenario. The constitution prohibits that?
“The only reasonable conclusion is that the legislation was motivated by an improper purpose, namely to restrict the availability of abortion services in Wisconsin,” Conley wrote ...
Wisconsin tried to pretend their motivation was to protect women’s health.
So, of course, as has happened again and again and again, these bills go nowhere ... they don’t even challenge Roe in any way.
NRTL’s four decades-long “strategy” is not only immoral and unconstitutional, IT HAS UTTERLY FAILED IN THE PRACTICAL WORLD.
It’s time to get back to the principles of the Declaration, the stated purposes of the Constitution, and its explicit requirements. Protect ALL, and then if the judges disagree, tell them to go to hell. And then impeach and remove their sorry, tyrannical butts from the bench.
“Oh, Please! If you don’t want an abortion, then don’t have one!” ~ Said EVERY Madistan LibTard EVER!
I hate these people so much. They’re going to be SO SURPRISED when they die and end up roasting in Hell for all of Eternity.
Funny how EVERY advocate FOR abortion is an already-born LibTard. Aarrgghhh!
Little children are as close as you can get to seeing and experiencing heaven without going there. That’s why the devil is so determined that our country continue to slaughter them mercilessly.
Matthew 19:13 Then little children were brought to Him that He might put His hands on them and pray, but the disciples rebuked them. 14 But Jesus said, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.” ...
Luke 17:2 “It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.”
democrat war’on women continues.
ridiculous not to have same standards for every one that does procedures that can kill someone if screwed up.
Roe vs. Wade and subsequent court opinions that opened the door to the slaughter of tens of millions of innocent children in America are all premised solely on the unreasonable, illogical, immoral dehumanization of the child. So how has the "pro-life movement" responded for more than four decades to this mindless, heartless travesty? By abandoning "you shall not murder," and the natural fact of the personhood of the child, and the natural law moral principles of the Declaration of Independence, and the stated purposes of the U.S. Constitution, all of them, and the explicit, imperative requirement of that Constitution that all persons must be provided equal protection for their supreme right, the right to live, and the obligations of the sacred oath of office to support and defend the Constitution. Instead, as a poor substitute, they promote lawless statutes that grant permission to kill babies, all of the babies, as long as those little helpless persons are murdered on schedule, and by some arbitrary set of man-made rules. And then they wonder why they continue to get nowhere, and why this holocaust continues unabated? They don't even understand the first things about the very subject of which they are supposed to be the "experts," it seems obvious to me. They've surrendered the only moral, constitutional and legal arguments against the practice of murdering children. Which means they are casualties, and therefore off the real battlefield.
While I agree with you in principle, please bear in mind that Constitution doesn’t expressly indicate the points that you mentioned, one problem being that the Constitution has been badly neglected.
When Roe v. Wade was decided for example, the states could have overturned Roe by appropriately amending the Constitution to limit or prohibit abortions. In fact, the 11th, 16th and 19th Amendments are examples of the states amending the Constitution specifically to overturn unpopular Supreme Court decisions.
But where were the states when the Supremes politically “amended” the so-called “right” to have an abortion to the Constitution from the bench?
And to complicate things, the 14th Amendment protects citizens with constitutional rights when they are born, not when they are conceived.
So let’s at least get the corrupt federal government out of the vote-winning abortion business.
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.