Replies

From a freind via email: FOUR are required to grant cert. I can see 3 wanting to overturn, but I can't see a fourth. Why would a fourth take the case, unless UPS just delievered a missing conscience. They can't do more damage than they already have. What else can the 3 with a conscience say in dissent? I wager cert denied. If otherwise, it may be interesting. I haven't followed the the case at all, so I can only speculate. WND supposed to have details later today. This is a publicity case, and catharsis for those women. I mean, why not? Absent divine intervention its a sure loser, but these women come clean in every way. And I think some of these women have been involved in pro-life for several years doing many different things. They probably just see this approach as another way to involve themselves, and are probably totally unaware of other Constitutional approaches. They do what the lawyers suggest, and the lawyers suggest federal law that dosen't effect Roe, along with long-shot court cases. That is what lawyers do, and since the citizens know that only the lawyers understand the Constitution, they never bother to look at it.

I've been on the periphery of the group, and firmly believe that everyone involved is totally sincere. And I pray for at least 4 judges who will agree to hear arguments, possibly to re-evaluate the "penundrums" and the beginning of human life.

We are already way behind on life issues. Scientists are inventing new ways to create lives that will be killed for research and for their parts - as though human life is valuable only for its utility to others.

We must win these battles. We must show the public the human brain cells that have been inserted in mice, the chimeras of mixed human and pig or other mammal DNA, the vats of human embryos that are being used to test drugs and medical treatments. We must teach the world that human lives are valuable and that every life that originated from human parentage is to be treated as possessing inalienable rights - as our children.

The appeal isn't about, nor will SCOTUS see it as being about, abortion - it's about whether or not the District of North Texas & 5th Circuit Courts properly applied Rule 60(b).

Federal District Court of North Texas ruled that the motion was not made within a reasonable amount of time, and 5th Circuit ruled that, because the laws under which the original suit was brought are no longer operative, the issue is moot. Tough to argue with either ruling.

The "newly discovered evidence" reason in subparagraph (2) is out by definition, given the 1 year limitation expressly delineated in 60(b).

I can't imagine the Court will see anything other than that both lower courts properly applied 60(b).

Bad choices by the plaintiffs. Publicity case, as you put it, indeed. Expensive, time consuming, and counter-productive.

From a freind via email: FOUR are required to grant cert. I can see 3 wanting to overturn, but I can't see a fourth. Why would a fourth take the case, unless UPS just delievered a missing conscience.