Posted on 01/17/2005 12:53:02 PM PST by davidosborne
C E N T E R F O R R E C L A I M I N G A M E R I C A From the Desk of Dr. Gary Cass, Executive Director + + PRO-LIFE ALERT,
1/17/2005 Supreme Court receives case to overturn Roe v. Wade (Forward to your pro-life friends)
On January 18, the U.S. Supreme Court will begin a process that could overturn Roe v. Wade! Because you have stood with the Center for Reclaiming America on pro-life issues, I wanted to alert you to this news. On January 18, Norma McCorvey (the original "Jane Roe" of Roe v. Wade) will file a legal appeal with the Supreme Court to have Roe v. Wade reversed. I will be in Washington, D.C., on that day to stand with our friends at The Justice Foundation in support of this case. The Justice Foundation has invested thousands upon thousands of hours in this case. They have gathered an enormous body of evidence to support Norma's case. Chris, this is a powerful opportunity to refute Roe v. Wade! Here is how you can help. First, notify your friends. Forward this message to everyone you know. We simply must get the word out. Second, please pray for Norma and the team at The Justice Foundation. Set aside time on January 18, specifically, to pray. Third, find out more about this case and how you can impact The Justice Foundation’s efforts here: http://www.operationoutcry.org Thank you! Dr. Gary Cass Executive Director Center for Reclaiming America + + For CENTER coverage of this issue: http://www.reclaimamerica.org/pages/operation/operationout.asp + + The Center for Reclaiming America, established by Dr. D. James Kennedy, is an outreach of Coral Ridge Ministries to inform the American public and motivate Christians to defend and implement the biblical principles on which our country was founded. The Center, led by Executive Director Dr. Gary Cass, provides non-partisan, non-denominational information, training, and support to all those interested in impacting the culture and renewing the vision set forth by our Founding Fathers. Questions? cfra@coralridge.org
Sean Hannity announced on his show today that she will be appearing on his show tonight. Could be this announcement.
Norma McCorvey is going to be on Hannity and Colmes tonight. Sean mentioned that she will have breaking news.
Appeal to SCOTUS is the last kiss o' the pig, and not likely to be heard by the Court.
In the words of the 5th Circuit:
The mootness doctrine “ensures that the litigant’s interest in the outcome continues to exist throughout the life of the lawsuit . . . including the pendency of the appeal.” Cook v. Colgate, 992 F.2d 17, 19 (2d Cir. 1993) (citing United States Parole Comm’n v. Geraghty, 445 U.S. 388, 395, 100 S. Ct. 1202, 1209 (1980)) (other citations omitted); see also Rocky v. King, 900 F.2d 864, 866 (5th Cir. 1990) (controversy must remain “live” throughout the litigation process). Mootness is the fatal issue for McCorvey.
IOW, don't get your hopes up.
The point of this whole matter is to BRING the matter before the court, and have the CURRENT court decide if the matter was correctly or INcorrectly decided originally....
Pro-Life bump!
You overturn judicial activism by overturning bad rulings using sound rulings that do not step into new areas of judicial activism.
You don't overturn judicial activism by inventing more judicial activism.
The latter is like "fighting for peace" or "fornicating for chastity."
You want every 30+-year-old case that didn't go someone's way reopened? That's what you'd get.
The entire basis of action is McCorvey's admission that she perjured herself. The proper time for her to have admitted this was in 1973. She didn't do it then, or within a reasonable time thereafter.
The issue of ABORTION is not MOOT ... it was controversial then, and it is controversial now, maybe even MORE SO, over the years, and thus should be revisited, and either UPHELD, or OVERTURNED. IMHO the argument of "precedence" is ONLY relevent to the LOWER courts. Lower courts can argue that although they disagree with the precedence they are BOUND by it... not so in the USSC
The Court won't hear this case. Norma McCorvey's stake in this case is moot as far as the court is concerned. Based on what I've read, I'd say that there is 0% chance of this Court, or any US Supreme Court, hearing the case. McCorvey has no personal stake in the outcome,no damages to recover, and there are no adverse parties. She's simply trying to overturn the decision that was in her favor. It doesn't work like that; she has no standing IMO.
I have a better chance of winning the lottery!
The cause of action for Ms. McCorvey in this specific filing (i.e., her statement that she lied when she claimed that she was raped) is moot.
"So, conservative judicial activism that overturns long-standing precedence on closing cases in a timely manner is a good thing?
Hoo boy. Better get ready for a BUNCH of lawyers to shout "MULLIGAN!" and re-litigate a bunch of moldy cases."
I guess you think Dredd Scott should not have been revisited.
1. Slim
2. None
1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us [our] sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
Bad lawyering by the CFRA.
The issue of ABORTION is not MOOT...
Dred Scott.
It never was; it was overturned by the 13th Amendment.
Good point
So you SUPPORT the process of Ammending the Constitution to Correct this Judicial Error, rather than have the court revisit the issue?
You are (deliberately?) conflating two different causes of action here, no matter how many times you are corrected.
The court will not consider this motion, because the case closed 32 years ago. The motion to reconsider under Rule 60(b) cannot meet any reasonable definition of timely review and reconsideration of the case.
The court will NOT discuss whether the matter was wrongly decided, because Ms. McCorvey's filing doesn't address that issue at all.
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.