[clee1]

This could be it. This might be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

If the USSC says that a minor can get an abortion without parental notification, all Hell's gonna break loose.

God help us all if they fark this up.

[mtbopfuyn]

Totally amazing minors can't get a tooth extracted but can legally get an unwanted human being extracted without parental permission.

[Tanniker Smith]

because it didn't provide an exception to protect the minor's health in the event of a medical emergency.

Oh, that makes it different. If the child has a serious health problem, by NO means should one inform her parents about it.

TS
(now where was that link to the article about "sarcasm"?)

[Borges]

Isn't the real issue here rape or incest? Is that what 'health problems' is a euphemism for?

[eureka!]

Let's see. This court has held one under 18 cannot get the death penalty for anything because of his or her youth. I wonder if age will matter in this case. Should be interesting. If Rehnquist steps down before this one is heard, look for the Mother of All Appointment Battles...

[gridlock]

In the main, parents are protectors of their children. Often girls (and I use the term advisedly, but we are talking about minor females here) are brought in for abortions by their adult boyfriends. This is often a part of the continuing pattern of subjugation and manipulation of young girls by older men. It would seem to me that a requirment of parental notification would get the parents, who are naturally protective of their children, involved in a matter where their protection is sorely needed.

Of course there need to be protections and judicial over-ride in cases where the parents are themselves abusive or, worse yet, have fathered the child through incest. But, generally speaking and absent abuse, it is better when parents are involved in the decisions of their children.

I don't see how proponents of abortion can fail to see this point.

[goldstategop]

Odds are good the SCOTUS will require a "health" exception to be added to parental notification laws along with a required judicial by-pass procedure. No, the Court is not going to use this case as a vehicle to overturn Roe. Rather, its going to decide what kind of limits on abortion at the margins are constitutionally acceptable.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[shekkian]

The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the 2003 law was unconstitutional because it didn't provide an exception to protect the minor's health in the event of a medical emergency.

What an idiotic argument. If my daughter's health is in jeopardy, I certainly want to know about it!

[kjam22]

Impecable timing for the SC to decide to take up this issue.... in light of the current near-nuke discussion taking place in the Senate. Nothing in politics happens by coincidence.... :)

[Maigrey]

This is the battle the left has been waging by proxy for 20+ years. If they can get the USSC to rule that a minor doesn't need consent to have an abortion, then the slippery slope begins for all actions towards minors - statutory rape charges will be null and void because of it as well.

[A CA Guy]

How come minorities haven't caught on to the fact that planned parenthood has set up shop mostly only in their communities to kill a far larger amount of their kids through abortion?

It's an outrage.